528.773 
M92J 


Legislative 
Spendthrifts 


Facts  Brought  Out  in  the  Fergus 

Suits,  Disclosing  the  Operations 

of    the    Easy    Money    Mill    at 

Springfield 

Compiled  and  Edited  by 

FAYETTE  S.  MUNRO 

(Attorney -at- Law) 

PRICE 


25c 


Believing  that  the  Voter  should  pay  his 
share,  this  book  is  placed  on  the 
market  at  a  price  sufficient  to  include 
the  cost  of  printing  and  distribution 


HONEST  GOVERNMENT  LEAGUE 

847  MARQUETTE  BUILDING 
CHICAGO 


Legislative 
Spendthrifts 


By 
FAYETTE  S.  MUNRO 


18 - 


PUBLISHED  BY 

THE  HONEST  GOVERNMENT  LEAGUE 
CHICAGO,  ILL. 

847  MARQUETTE  BUILDING 


Copyright,  August,  1916. 


CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATION 


OF    CHICAGO 


o, 
,  R   !..i... 

£!S   P,."Li, 
r  E    Prvwiaf 
rJ  C   Sk.Ml.H 


ROOM  1607  LUMBER  EXCHANGE  Bui 
II   South   La  S.UIc  Street 


Chicago,  May  1,  1916. 

Honorable  Fayette  S.  Munro, 

Highland  Park,  111. 
Dear  Sir: 

Having  learned  that  you  have  some  thought  of  telling  in  book 
form  the  story  of  the  Legislative  Injunction  Suits,  which  have  received 
the  moral  and  financial  backing  of  the  Citizens'  Association  of  Chicago, 
v/e  feel  impelled  to  Join  in  urging  that  you  do  so.      In  our  opinlor 
the  people  of  the  State  are  entitled  to  a  more  detailed  statement  than 
has  yet  been  given  of  the  facts  of  public  Interest  brought  out  by  the 
suits  and  by  the  incidental  investigation  of  state  affaire. 
Very  truly, 


350312 


It  is  generally  known  that  John  B.  Fergus  of  Chicago 
filed,  on  July  9,  1915,  four  injunction  suits,  commonly 
called  the  "Mileage  Bill,"  "Omnibus  Bill,"  "Deficiency 
Bill"  and  "Private  Belief  Bill."  In  August,  1915,  an 
additional  bill,  known  as  the  O'Hara  Bill"  or  "Commit- 
tee Expense  Bill,'-'  was  filed. 

Upon  my  return  from  Springfield,  following  the  in- 
terview with  the  Governor,  as  set  forth  in  the  chapter, 
"LET  THE  BOYS  HAVE  IT,"  great  difficulty  was  ex- 
perienced in  securing  some  person  or  group  of  persons  to 
file  the  bill  as  suggested  by  Governor  Dunne.  While  each 
person  interviewed  admitted  that  something  ought  to  be 
done,  they  preferred  to  have  someone  else  take  the 
initiative. 

I  was  invited  to  take  lunch  with  a  small  group  of 
men  who  were  interested  in  public  questions.  This  group 
included  Lawrence  P.  Boyle,  John  A.  Watson,  Sidney  J. 
Sax,  Edward  F.  Cummings,  Bobert  F.  Kolb,  E.  Milton 
Zola,  E.  A.  Zimmerman,  John  B.  Fergus,  Harold  Snell, 
S.  J.  Duncan-Clarke,  Thos.  D.  Knight  and  others.  When 
I  detailed  to  them  my  story,  they  decided  to  back  up  any 
litigation  which  would  correct  the  evils  presented.  John 
B.  Fergus  was  selected  as  the  man  in  whose  name  the  bill 
would  be  filed. 

In  the  preparation  of  the  bills  and  the  carrying  on 
of  the  litigation,  which  has  taken  us  twice  to  the  Supreme 
Court,  John  A.  Watson  has  performed  a  great  service. 
He  is  an  eminent  lawyer  in  the  City  of  Chicago,  with  a 
large  practice.  His  advice  and  judgment  have  been  of 
greatest  value. 

Mr.  Watson  and  I  desire  to  acknowledge  our  personal 
obligation  to  the  law  firm  of  Stevens  &  Herndon  of 
Springfield.  They  have  contributed  their  services  as 
local  attorneys. 


J.  J.  Mitchell,  expert  accountant,  at  my  solicitation, 
made  a  trip  to  Springfield  and  spent  several  days  going 
over  the  records.  He  received  his  expenses,  but  made  no 
charge  for  his  services. 

We  are  indebted  to  Roswell  B.  Mason,  Master  in 
Chancery  in  the  City  of  Chicago,  for  a  material  reduction 
in  his  fees. 

The  Citizens'  Association  of  Chicago  is  one  of  the 
oldest  organizations  engaged  in  general  welfare  work. 
For  nearly  two  generations  this  body  of  men  have  as- 
sisted in  the  enforcement  of  the  laws.  Their  officers  are 
public-spirited  citizens  who  give  a  considerable  portion 
of  their  time  to  matters  of  public  concern  and  for  which 
they  receive  no  material  return.  The  present  Board  of 
Directors  consists  of  Frederick  W.  Burlingham,  Francis 
E.  Bromell,  George  E.  Cole,  Charles  Dickinson,  Joseph 
Donnersberger,  Bernard  A.  Eckhart,  Moses  E.  Greene- 
baum,  Eobert  S.  Hotz,  George  E.  Jenkins,  Frederick  Z. 
Mark,  Augustus  S.  Peabody,  Eugene  E.  Trussing,  Wil- 
ford  C.  Shurtleff,  Julius  Stern  and  Edward  C.  Went- 
worth. 

Mr.  Watson  and  myself  appealed  to  this  Association 
for  help.  We  recognized  that  it  would  be  too  great  a 
burden  for  our  group  of  men  to  carry  on.  The  Associa- 
tion received  us  cordially  and  accepted  and  undertook  to 
raise  the  necessary  funds  for  expenses,  it  being  expressly 
understood  that  Mr.  Watson  and  I  would  donate  our  legal 
services. 

The  Citizens'  Association  made  a  public  request  for 
funds  and  received  a  few  dollars  less  than  $3,000.  With 
considerable  care,  we  have  been  able  to  carry  on  five  law 
suits  for  over  a  year  and  still  have  some  of  this  money 
left,  all  bills  being  paid  through  the  Citizens'  Association. 

The  public  is  indebted  to  this  Association  and  to  its 
secretary,  Mr.  Shelby  M.  Singleton,  whose  large  experi- 
ence and  ability  are  well  known. 

We  wish  to  also  acknowledge  the  courtesy  which  we 
have  received  at  the  hands  of  Patrick  J.  Lucey,  Attor- 
ney-General of  Illinois,  and  Lester  II.  Strawn  and  A.  E. 
Eoy,  his  assistants.  While  the  contest  has  been  severe, 

5 


our  opponents  have  conducted  themselves  with  due  re- 
gard to  professional  amenities. 

These  acknowledgments  would  be  incomplete  without 
a  reference  to  Judge  Creighton.  James  A.  Creighton  has 
served  continuously  as  Judge  of  the  Circuit  Court  of  San- 
gamon  County  for  thirty-five  years.  His  docket  is 
crowded  with  important  cases.  He  is  a  man  well  ad- 
vanced in  age  and  his  work  is  stupendous.  Because  of 
the  importance  of  the  litigation,  he  gave  the  better  por- 
tion of  his  vacation  in  August,  1915,  to  consider  the  mat- 
ters presented. 


LET  THE  BOYS  HAVE  IT 

I  have  been  personally  acquainted  with  Governor 
Edward  F.  Dunne  for  a  long  period  of  time.  During  my 
service  in  Springfield  I  consulted  him  frequently  with 
reference  to  legislation.  During  all  that  term  I  had  no 
reason  to  believe  that  he  was  otherwise  than  a  man  of 
the  highest  integrity.  This  was  particularly  noticeable 
in  his  attack  at  the  opening  of  the  session  upon  the  jack- 
potters.  His  statement  denouncing  the  members  of  his 
party  who  had  participated  in  the  election  of  William 
Lorimer  to  the  United  States  Senate  brought  forth  a  tor- 
rent of  abuse  from  Lee  O'Neil  Browne  and  other  mem- 
bers upon  the  head  of  the  Chief  Executive.  So  long  as 
the  Governor  of  Illinois  was  opposed  to  this  class  of  poli- 
ticians, I  was  with  him. 

While  not  a  member  of  the  Legislature  in  the  session 
of  1915,  I  was  interested  in  securing  appropriate  legis- 
lation whereby  the  state  would  acquire  and  own  a  large 
park  on  the  Eock  River.  A  society  interested  in  pre- 
serving natural  scenery  asked  me  to  go  to  Springfield  to 
secure  proper  legislation  with  regard  to  this  park.  This 
society  was  composed  of  philanthropic  people  and  they 
agreed  to  present  the  park  to  the  State. 

Having  been  a  member  of  the  Legislature,  I  was  ex- 
tremely interested  in  legislation  in  general.  I  spent  many 
hours  in  the  gallery,  observing  the  course  of  prospective 
bills. 

There  was  considerable  talk  about  a  mileage  bill. 
The  operation  of  the  anti-pass  law  compelled  the  mem- 
bers to  pay  their  carfare  and  a  number  of  them  strenu- 
ously objected  to  paying  out  any  money  for  transporta- 
tion. On  the  other  hand,  a  large  number  of  the  mem- 
bers were  familiar  with  the  constitutional  restriction  for- 
bidding special  appropriations  for  legislators.  On  the 
day  the  bill  came  before  the  House,  a  number  of  men  pro- 
tested against  its  passage,  presenting  the  constitutional 

7 


restriction.  These  opponents  presented  their  arguments 
to  a  "packed"  jury. 

The  legislature  had  already  appropriated  over 
$1,000,000  to  the  farmers  of  the  state  and  the  appeal  of 
Lee  O'Neil  Browne  that  "charity  should  begin  at  home" 
was  still  ringing  in  their  ears.  It  was  a  matter  of  only 
$26,000  and  between  the  individual  members  and  their  pro 
rata  share  of  that  sum  of  money  there  existed  simply 
the  Constitution  as  a  barrier.  It  passed  the  House  by  a 
vote  of  103  to  29.  As  this  vote  was  being  taken  I  won- 
dered what  Joseph  Medill  or  Judge  Scholfield,  who  helped 
draft  the  constitutional  restriction,  would  have  said  had 
they  been  present !  The  oath  which  the  members  of  the 
Legislature  take  was  prepared  by  these  men  with  great 
care.  They  felt  certain  that  a  legislator  would  not  sub- 
scribe to  that  oath  and  then  openly  violate  the  Constitu- 
tion. The  oath  is  in  part  as  follows : 

"  I  do  solemnly  swear  that  I  will  support  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  and  the  Constitution  of  the 
State  of  Illinois,  nor  will  I  accept  or  receive, 

directly  or  indirectly,  any  money  or  other  valuable  thing 
from  any  corporation,  company  or  person,  for  any  vote 
or  influence  I  may  give  or  withhold  on  any  bill,  resolu- 
tion or  appropriation,  or  for  any  other  official  act." 

After  the  passage  of  the  bill  and  its  certification  to 
the  Senate  for  its  adoption,  but  before  a  final  vote  had 
been  taken,  I  felt  it  my  duty  as  a  citizen  to  call  upon  the 
Governor  and  enter  my  personal  protest  against  such  a 
flagrant  violation  of  the  Constitution.  I  was  received  cor- 
dially by  the  Governor  and  laid  the  matter  before  him. 

I  assumed  that  the  Governor  would  veto  the  bill  when 
it  reached  him.  He  was  frank  with  me.  He  said  a  num- 
ber of  the  men  in  the  Legislature  had  come  to  him  with  a 
proposition  that  instead  of  direct  legislation  they  would 
appropriate  a  sufficient  sum  of  money  for  incidental  ex- 
penses and  each  member  could  receive  his  mileage  money 
out  of  such  an  appropriation.  The  Governor  stated  he 
didn  't  think  such  an  action  wise  and  that  they  should  ap- 
propriate the  money  directly  to  themselves  and  not  "beat 
the  devil  around  the  bush." 


I  called  to  his  attention  various  constitutional  pro- 
visions and  the  Governor  said  that  while  he  was  aware  of 
these  provisions,  he  had  decided  to  "LET  THE  BOYS 
HAVE  IT." 

My  disappointment  was  very  great  and  I  expressed 
myself  to  the  Governor  in  quite  strong  terms.  When  he 
ascertained  how  strongly  I  felt  upon  the  matter,  he 
turned  to  me  and  said : 

"Munro,  if  you  feel  so  badly  about  it,  why  don't  you 
file  a  bill!" 

In  my  practice  I  had  never  had  occasion  to  examine 
the  right  of  a  taxpayer  to  institute  proceedings  involving 
State  appropriations,  and  had  it  not  been  for  the  sugges- 
tion of  Governor  Dunne,  the  litigation  and  the  five  injunc- 
tion suits  would  probably  never  have  been  instituted. 

The  attitude  of  the  Governor  caused  me  to  believe 
he  had  lost  control  of  the  Legislature.  "The  boys"  were 
running  the  State,  and  to  them  the  Constitution  seemed 
only  a  scrap  of  paper. 

This  led  me  into  an  investigation  of  other  appro- 
priation bills  and  finally  into  an  examination  of  a  great 
number  of  the  vouchers  and  records  of  the  State.  The 
information  which  I  have  secured  in  preparing  for  the 
various  cases  has  given  me  the  data  which  is  detailed  in 
this  book.  I  have  mentioned  the  fact  that  Governor 
Dunne  won  my  regard  because  of  his  attack  upon  Lee 
O'Neil  Browne  and  other  members  of  the  House.  Since 
1913  much  water  has  gone  over  the  dam  and  Lee  O'Neil 
Browne  is  to-day  the  stanch  supporter  of  Governor 
Dunne.  The  crowd  which  generally  votes  with  Browne 
apparently  are  likewise  in  the  Governor's  confidence.  He 
has  appointed  men  to  office  at  the  suggestion  of  Browne. 
He  has  approved  appropriations  amounting  to  $40,000 
in  which  Browne  was  interested. 

The  attitude  of  "LET  THE  BOYS  HAVE  IT"  has 
permeated  the  administrative  departments  of  the  State. 
The  Public  Treasury  has  been  assaulted  from  all  angles. 
Its  official  defenders  have  refused  to  fight. 


THE    MILEAGE    BILL 

In  the  old  "public  be  damned"  days,  when  the  big 
railroad  corporations  of  Illinois  formed  an  integral  part 
of  our  political  organizations,  there  came  into  existence 
the  railroad  pass. 

Some  officeholders  had  come  to  look  upon  free  rail- 
road transportation  as  a  legitimate  perquisite  of  their 
positions  at  the  time  the  constitution  was  adopted  in  1870. 
In  the  convention  which  gave  the  present  basic  law  to 
the  state  there  was  much  debate  as  to  whether  or  not 
there  should  be  included  in  the  document  a  specific  provi- 
sion forbidding  officeholders  from  receiving  such  favors 
from  the  big  transportation  companies. 

Such  action  was  not  taken  because  the  delegates  in- 
sisted that  the  very  ground  work  principles  of  the  Con- 
stitution forbade  by  inference  any  such  practices  and 
that  the  oath  taken  by  legislators  and  other  officials 
should  prove  an  effective  barrier  against  the  acceptance 
of  railroad  passes: 

But  within  a  decade  it  had  become  the  regular  thing 
for  men  in  public  office  to  receive  such  gratuities  and  they 
justified  the  acceptance  of  passes  upon  the  ground  that 
the  railroads  simply  were  honoring  the  official  positions 
and  not  the  men  who  held  them.  Within  the  second  dec- 
ade the  pass  had  become  a  great  legislative  factor.  The 
judicious  distribution  of  transportation  among  members 
of  the  General  Assembly  was  getting  results  for  the  rail- 
roads at  Springfield.  Legislatures  were  slow  to  pass 
bills  that  embarrassed  railroads  and  were  responsive 
when  it  came  to  enacting  laws  desired  by  them. 

The  distribution  of  passes  was  extended  to  nearly 
all  elective  officers  within  the  borders  of  the  common- 
wealth, certainly  to  all  who  had  anything  to  do  with 
granting  or  withholding  favors  from  railway  interests. 
City  aldermen,  county  board  members,  legislators  and 
judges  all  were  recipients  of  these  free  traveling  certifi- 

10 


cat'es.  Nearly  every  elective  official  who  was  offered 
passes  accepted  them  up  to  a  few  years  ago,  when  public 
opinion  began  to  frown  upon  the  custom. 

In  1915,  the  members  of  the  Legislature  for  the  first 
time  in  their  experience  were  obliged  to  pay  actual  cash 
for  their  transportation.  Many  schemes  were  suggested 
by  which  they  could  secure  this  transportation.  The  rea- 
son for  resorting  to  some  indirect  method  was  the  Con- 
stitution. Now,  the  constitution  provides  in  several  sec- 
tions that  there  shall  be  no  increase  in  compensation  or 
perquisites  during  the  term  for  which  a  man  is  elected. 
It  also  provides  that  the  members  of  the  Legislature  shall 
receive,  besides  their  salary,  their  mileage  to  and  from 
Springfield  and  $50  for  all  other  expenses.  This  means 
one  trip  each  way.  They  had  already  been  paid  their 
$2,000  and  their  $50  and  their  mileage. 

I  presume  that  the  first  scheme  suggested  emanated 
from  the  fertile  brain  of  Lee  O'Neil  Browne.  At  least, 
he  took  an  extremely  active  interest  in  attempting  to 
secure  its  enactment. 

It  was  tlat  the  Legislature  pass  a  bill  giving  to  each 
member  of  the  Legislature  $1,000  for  a  private  secretary. 
This  plan  would  work  out  admirably,  because  they  could 
employ  a  private  secretary  for  considerably  less  than 
$1,000  and  keep  the  difference — or  they  could  do  their  own 
work  as  private  secretary  and  keep  the  entire  $1,000. 

When  the  matter  finally  came  up  in  the  House, 
Browne  was  insistent  upon  this  plan.  He  stated  they 
were  about  to  vote  a  million  dollars  to  the  farmers  whose 
cattle  had  been  slain  by  the  State  as  the  result  of  the  foot 
and  mouth  epidemic,  and  he  suggested  while  they  were 
giving  away  a  lot  of  money  they  shouldn't  forget  them- 
selves ;  in  fact,  that  ' l  charity  should  begin  at  home. ' ' 

The  plan  of  securing  mileage  through  the  method  of 
an  appropriation  for  private  secretaries  didn't  take  well 
with  the  public  and  the  bill  was  not  passed. 

The  legislators  were  determined  to  secure  their  mile- 
age, so  a  resolution  was  introduced  which  provided  for 
twenty-one  round  trips  at  two  cents  a  mile  each  way. 
On  June  3, 1915,  there  were  considered  by  the  House  three 

11 


bills :  First,  the  mileage  bill — an  appropriation  of  $26,- 
270.18 ;  second,  a  bill  to  relieve  the  members  of  the  Legis- 
lature from  the  provisions  of  the  anti-pass  law ;  third,  a 
bill  increasing  the  salaries  of  the  members  from  $2.000 
to  $3,500. 

All  three  of  these  bills  passed  the  House  and  the  first 
and  last  received  the  approval  of  the  Senate  and  the 
Governor. 

The  suggestion  of  Lee  0  'Neil  Browne  that  ' '  charity 
should  begin  at  home ' '  was  taken  to  heart  and  acted  upon 
in  a  substantial  manner.  The  proposition  to  relieve  the 
members  of  the  General  Assembly  from  the  anti-pass  law 
while  the  rest  of  the  State  paid  transportation  is  a  fine 
illustration  of  what  often  happens — the  failure  of  a  legis- 
lative body  to  have  any  respect  for  public  opinion. 

Now,  these  bills  did  not  pass  either  the  House  or  the 
Senate  without  strenuous  objection.  Representative  At- 
wood  brought  up  the  bill  which  exempted  the  members 
of  the  Legislature  in  the  operation  of  the  anti-pass  pro- 
visions of  the  law.  Mr.  Rothschild  led  the  fight  against 
the  bilL  On  second  reading,  he  was  aided  in  this  respect 
by  Mr.  Hubbard,  Mr.  Houston,  Mr.  Igoe  and  Mr.  Kane 
and  opposed  by  Lee  O'Neil  Browne,  Merritt  and  Butler. 
(House  Debates,  pages  864-874.) 

In  the  Senate,  objection  to  this  bill  was  made  by  Sen- 
ators Hull  and  Keller  (Senate  Debates,  394-402),  and 
the  proposition  was  turned  down. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  the  mileage  bill  came 
up  in  two  forms :  a  resolution  and  an  appropriation  act. 
The  resolution — known  as  House  Joint  Resolution  No. 
20 — specified  that  each  member  of  the  House  should  have 
twenty-one  round  trips  at  two  cents  a  mile,  while  the 
appropriation  act  set  forth  the  amount  of  money  neces- 
sary. 

In  the  debate  upon  this  question  the  greatest  oppo- 
sition was  developed  in  the  Senate,  where  Senators  Hull, 
Smith  and  Canaday  led  the  fight,  and  were  opposed  by 
Senators  Barr,  Denvir,  Daily  and  Cleary.  (Sen.  Deb., 
518-520.) 

12 


We  now  give  the  names  of  the  men  who  voted  for 
and  against  both  the  resolution  and  the  bill.  , 

IN    THE    HOUSE 
Those  voting  on  the  resolution  in  the  affirmative  are : 


Bippus 

Boyer 

Brewer 

Brinkman 

Brown,  W.  M. 

Burns 

Burres 

Butler 

Curren,  C. 

Curran,  T. 

Dahlberg 

Dalton 

Desmond 

Devereux 

Donahue 

Donlan 

Dudgeon 

Epstein 

Farrell 

Felts 

Festerling 

Fieldstack 

Foster 

Franz 

Gardner 

Garesche 

Gorman 


Graham,  T.  E. 

Griffin 

Harvey 

Helwig 

Hilton 

Hruby 

Igoe 

Jackson 

Jacobson 

Leech 

LePage 

Lipshulch 

Lyle 

Lynch 

Lyon 

Maucker 

McCabe 

McCormick 

McGloon 

Meents 

Moore 

Mulcahy 

Murphy 

O'Connell 

O'Eourke 

Placek 


Prendergast 

Purdunn 

Eentchler 

Eethmeier 

Eostenkowski 

Eyan,  Frank 

Evan,  F.  J. 

Eyan,  J.  W. 

Santry 

Seif 

Shurtleff 

Smejkal 

Smith 

Stewart 

Thompson 

Tompkins 

Trandel 

Turnbaugh 

Turner 

Tuttle 

Vickers 

Walsh 

Weber 

Williamson 

Wilson,  E.  E. 

Young 

Yeas  ..79 


Those  voting  on  the  resolution  in  the  negative  are : 


Barker 

Basel 

Bentley 

Boyd 

Bruce 


Campbell 

Cooper 

Davis 

DeYoung 

Ellis 


Flagg 

Graham,  W.  J. 
Green,  C. 
Green,  E.  W. 
Groves 


13 


Hubbard  Perkins 

Kane  Provine 

Kasserman  Richardson 

Madsen  Rothschild 

Mason  Rowe,  W. 

Mitchell  Scholes 

Morris  Strubinger 

Pace  Taylor 

Present  but  not  voting  are 
field. 


Thomas  on 
Thon 
Tice 
Vursell 
West 

Wilson,  H. 
Mr.  Speaker. 
Nays   


38 


Messrs.  Atwood,  Stan- 


The  foregoing  resolution  was  accompanied  by  an 
appropriation  act,  which  was  known  as  House  Bill  882. 
This  bill  appropriated  $26,270.18  for  the  mileage  of  the 
members.  The  vote  on  this  bill  occurs  on  page  957  of  the 
Journal  and  is  as  follows : 


Those  voting 

Barker 

Bippus 

Boyer 

Brewer 

Brinkman 

Brown,  W.  M. 

Browne,  L.  O'N. 

Bruce 

Burns 

Burres 

Butler 

Campbell 

Conlon 

Curren,  C. 

Curran,  T. 

Dahlberg 

Dalton 

Desmond 

Devereux 

Donohue 

Donlan 

Dudgeon 

Elliott 


in  the  affirmative  are :    Messrs. 


Epstein 

Fahy 

Farrell 

Fieldstack 

Foster 

Frankhauser 

Franz 

Gardner 

Garesche 

Gorman 

Graham,  T.  E. 

Green,  E.  W. 

Griffin 

Hamlin 

Harvey 

Helwig 

Hennebry 

Hicks 

Hilton 

Hoffman 

Holaday 

Hruby 

Hubbard 

14 


Igoe 
Jackson 
Jacobson 
Kilens 
Leech 
LePage 
Lipshulch 
Lyle 
Lynch 
Lyon 
Maucker 
McCabe 
McCormick 
McGloon 
Meents 
Merritt 
Mitchell 
Moore 
Morrasy 
Mulcahy 
Murphy 
O'Connell 
'  O'Eourke 


Pierson  Scanlan  Trandel 

Placek  Sclmberth  Turnbaugh 

Prendergast  Self  Turner 

Purdunn  Shephard  Tuttle 

Ray  Shurtleff  Vickers 

Rentchler  Smejkal  Walsh 

Rethmeier  Smith  Weber 

Roderick  Stanfield  Williamson 

Ryan,  Frank  Stewart  Wilson,  R.  E. 

Ryan,  F.  J.  Thon  Young 

Ryan,  J.  W.  Tompkins  Mr.  Speaker 

Santry  Yeas    :..103 

Those  voting  in  the  negative  are :    Messrs. 

Bentley  Kessinger  Rothschild 

Davis  Lantz  Rowe,  W. 

Devine  Madsen  Scholes 

DeYoung  Mason  Thomason 

Ellis  Morris  Tice 

Flagg  Pace  West 

Graham,  W.  J.  Provine  Wilson,  G.  fl. 

Huston  Quisenberry  Wilson,  H. 

Kane  Rinehart  Wood 

Kasserman  Roe,  A.  Nays 29 

In  the  Senate,  Resolution  No.  20  was  voted  on  on 
May  19,  1915,  and  the  record  (Senate  Journal  896)  is  as 
follows : 

Those  voting  in  the  affirmative :    Messrs. 

Abt  Dailey  Landee 

Bailey  Denvir  Latham 

Baldwin  Glackin  Meeker 

Bardill  Gorman  Olson 

Boehm  Haase  Roos 

Broderick  Harris  Sullivan 

Canaday  Herlihy  Swanson 

Carroll  Hughes  Womack 

Coleman  Hurley  Yeas 26 

15 


The  following  voted  in  the  negative:    Messrs. 

Andrus  Ettelson  McNay 

Austin  Franklin  Pervier 

Campbell  Hull  Piercy 

Cliffe  Jewell  Smith 

Compton  Manny  Woodward 

Cfrrnwell  Nays 16 

When  House  Bill  No.  882,  which  made  the  appropria- 
tion, came  to  the  Senate,  the  vote  was  taken  on  June  10, 
1915,  and  appears  on  page  1313  of  the  Senate  Journal,  as 
follows:  Those  voting  in  the  affirmative:  Messrs. 

Abt  Dailey  Keller 

Andrus  Denvir  Latham 

Baldwin  Franklin  Meeker 

Bardill  Glackin  McNay 

Barr  Gorman  Olson 

Boehm  Haase  Boos 

Broderick  Hamilton  Shaw 

Canaday  Harris  Smith 

Carroll  Herlihy  Sullivan 

Cleary  Hughes  Swanson 

Coleman  Hurley  Womack 

Curtis  Yeas    34 

Negative : 
Campbell  Compton  Piercy 

Nays   3 

Twenty-one  Round  Trips  at  Two  Cents  a  Mile 

The  resolution  stated  that  each  member  should  re- 
ceive a  sum  of  money  based  upon  twenty-one  round  trips 
at  two  cents  a  mile.  It  made  no  difference  whether  the 
member — as  in  the  case  of  Medill  McCormick — resided 
at  Springfield  throughout  the  entire  session  or  whether 
he  made  numerous  trips  to  other  parts  of  the  State,  for 
which  his  carfare  had  been  paid.  It  is  not  on  record  that 
any  man,  except  Medill  McCormick,  refused  to  receive  his 
check  on  the  ground  he  had  previously  been  paid  or  that 
he  had  not  traveled.  A  number  of  representatives  and 
senators  did  not  take  or  cash  their  warrants.  Eepresenta- 

16 


tive  Devine  of  Dixon  made  a  strong  fight  in  the  House 
against  the  passage  of  this  bill  and  when  he  received  his 
State  warrant,  indorsed  it  back  to  the  State  and  wrote  a 
letter  to  the  auditor  returning  his  check  and  stating  his 
reasons  therefor.  A  large  number  of  the  representatives 
and  senators  did  not  cash  their  warrants.  The  following 
is  a  list  of  the  representatives  and  senators  who  did  not 
accept  the  money  or  cash  their  warrants: 

Representative  Wm.  H.  Basil 
Representative  Wm.  H.  Bentley 
Representative  R.  Boyd 
Representative  Thomas  Campbell 
Representative  John  L.  Cooper 
Representative  F.  R.  De  Young 
Representative  DeGoy  B.  Ellis 
Representative  W.  J.  Graham 
Representative  Carl  Green 
Representative  C.  A.  Gregory 
Representative  John  P.  Devine 
Representative  W.   C.  Kane 
Representative  John  Kasserman 
Representative  H.  C.  Kessinger 
Representative  M.  McCormick 
Representative  W.  T.  Morris 
Representative  Walter  Provine 
Representative  Clifford  Quissenburg 
Representative  W.  E.  Rinehart 
Representative  I.  S.  Rothschild 
Representative  D.  E.»Shanahan 
Representative  R.  S.  Taylor 
Representative  J.  W.  Thomason 
Representative  G.  H.  Wilson 
Representative  Harry  Wilson 
Senator  Michael  B.  Bailey 
Senator  F.  C.  Campbell 
Senator  M.  H.  Cleary 
Senator  Adam  C.  Cliffe 
Senator  Wm.  A.  Compton 
Senator  Edward  C.  Curtis 
Senator  John  Dailey 

17 


Senator  Samuel  A.  Ettelson 
Senator  Kent  E.  Kellar 
Senator  Walter  I.  Manny 
Senator  Clayton  E.  Pervier 
Senator  W.  Duff  Piercy 
Senator  Morton  D.  Hull 

The  effect  of  the  decision  in  the  Supreme  Court  was 
that  each  man  who  had  received  this  money  was  obligated 
to  pay  it  back  to  the  State.  While  a  number  immediately 
paid  it  back,  those  who  failed  to  pay  came  under  the 
operation  of  a  certain  provision  of  law  to  which  the  at- 
tention of  the  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts  was  called, 
namely:  that  where  any  man  owes  the  State  any  money 
and  the  State  is  about  to  make  a  payment  to  him,  the 
Auditor  shall  deduct  from  his  warrant  the  amount  so 
owing. 

Furthermore,  there  is  a  provision  in  the  Constitu- 
tion to  the  effect  that  certain  persons  owing  the  State 
money  are  disqualified  from  holding  any  public  office 
until  such  debt  is  paid. 

It  is  understood  that  nearly  all,  if  not  all,  the  mem- 
bers who  accepted  the  mileage  have  repaid  the  State. 


The  Senate  Chamber  is  in  the  north  wing  of  the  third 
floor  of  the  capitol  building.  There  are  several  commit- 
tee rooms  and  two  cloak  rooms  connected  with  it. 

To  keep  this  room,  as  well  as  the  committee  rooms, 
cleaned,  a  corps  of  janitors  was  employed  by  the  Senate 
and  paid  per  diem  upon  a  payroll  certified  to  by  the  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor. It  appears  from  these  payrolls  that 
the  following  gentlemen  worked  for  the  following  num- 
ber of  days  and  received  the  following  amounts : 

Parker,  Dowell,  janitor,  176  days  at  $2.50 $  440.00 

Madden,  Kichard,  janitor,  176  days  at  $2.50 440.00 

Roche,  D.  J.,  janitor,  60  days  at  $2.50 150.00 

McCullom,  Ferrol,  janitor,  112  days  at  $2.50 280.00 

Carson,  Miller,  janitor,  176  days  at  $2.50 440.00 

Rushkewicz,  Frank,  janitor,  167  days  at  $2.50 417.50 

Schmitz,  Sam,  janitor,  136  days  at  $2,50 340.00 

Hull,  George,  janitor,  97  days  at  $2.50 242.50 

Finley,  Clarence,  janitor,  96  days  at  $2.50 240.00 

Curran,  Michael,  janitor,  96  days  at  $2.50 240.00 

Total  $3,230.00 

On  the  face  of  the  payroll,  these  ten  men  worked  their 
relative  number  of  days  and  received  the  amounts  of 
money  for  services  performed  for  the  State.  On  the 
llth  day  of  July,  1915,  I  subpoenaed  before  the  Master 
in  Chancery,  of  the  Circuit  Court  of  Sangamon  County, 
Dowell  Parker.  At  the  time  of  his  subpoena  he  was  work- 
ing as  a  janitor  in  the  State  House  on  the  Secretary  of 
State's  payroll.  He  was  cleaning  floors  on  the  first  floor 
of  the  capitol  building.  He  is  a  colored  man  with  a  repu-. 
tation  for  being  a  good  worker. 

Parker  came  and  gave  his  testimony  in  a  straight- 
forward way.  He  said  he  was  employed  as  a  janitor  in 
the  Senate,  starting  at  the  beginning  of  the  session  in 
1915,  and  staying  until  its  close;  that  his  duties  were  to 
see  that  the  Senate  Chamber  was  thoroughly  cleaned  each 
day,  the  papers  picked  up  and  the  various  committee 

19 


rooms  put  in  proper  shape;  that  he  worked  throughout 
the  entire  session;  that  Miller  Carson  also  worked  and 
helped  him  and  that  the  two  of  them  did  all  the  janitor 
work  that  was  done  from  January  6  to  June  30,  1915, 
in  the  Senate  Chamber  or  Senate  committee  rooms. 

Q.  Who  else  was  janitor  besides  you?  A.  Miller 
Carson. 

Q.  Did  you  work  throughout  the  session  of  the  Sen- 
ate? A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  Mr.  Carson  work  throughout  the  session  of 
the  Senate?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  know  a  janitor  by  the  name  of  D.  J. 
Roche  in  the  Senate?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  know  a  janitor  by  the  name  of  Ferrol 
McCullom?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  know  a  janitor  by  the  name  of  Miller 
Carson?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  a  janitor  by  the  name  of  Frank 
Rushkewicz?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  a  janitor  by  the  name  of  Clarence 
Finley.  A.  I  believe  I  do  know  him. 

Q.  Do  you  know  a  janitor  by  the  name  of  Michael 
Curran?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Can  you  name  any  other  janitors  other  than 
yourself  and  Carson  who  were  doing  any  work  in  the  Sen- 
ate during  the  session  ?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.     Who  were  doing  any  work  in  the  Senate  during 

the  session?    A.    No,  sir. 

*     *     *     * 

Q.  Did  you  see  any  men  around  there  ventilating 
the  windows  with  long  poles?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  many?  A.  I  saw  a  tall,  slim  fellow,  some- 
times, you  know;  why,  whoever  the  sergeant  would  be 
close  to  he  would  tell  to  ventilate  the  rooms,  and  they 
would  do  so. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  many  acted  as  ventilators  ?  A. 
I  don't  believe  there  was  but  one. 

Q.  Were  you  there  much  of  the  time  the  Senate  was 
in  session?  A.  Sometimes  1  would  spend  half  a  day 
after  my  work  and  then  I  would  come  back  about  noon, 

20 


after  I  had  my  breakfast,  and  then,  when  they  assembled 
again,  I  would  settle  down  and  wait  until  evening,  think- 
ing I  would  get  a  chance  to  clean  up. 

Q.  And  Carson  would  do  the  same?  A.  Yes,  sir; 
we  had  to  take  care  of  the  rooms  and  the  committee 
rooms,  too. 

Q.  Did  you  do  any  work  in  the  Lieutenant-Govern- 
or's rooms!  A.  Well,  one  or  two  mornings  his  janitor 
was  sick  and  we  did  that  out  of  courtesy. 

Q.    Who  was  the  janitor?    A.    Ben  Savage. 

Q.     He  had  only  one  room?    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  rooms  did  you  and  Carson  have?  A. 
I  don't  remember  how  many. 

Q.    And  nobody  helped  you?    A.    No,  sir. 

For  years  past  it  has  been  a  smart  and  clever 
thing  to  put  men  on  the  payroll  as  janitors  or  clerks  who, 
in  fact,  perform  no  services  but  draw  their  salaries. 

The  House  likewise  had  a  number  of  janitors  on  the 
payroll.  Champ  Singleton,  who  said  he  had  been  a  jani- 
tor in  the  State  House  for  three  and  one-half  years,  tes- 
tified as  follows: 

Q.     Do  you  know  E.  J.  Cruthis  ?    A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  know  Anton  Soci?    A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Henry  P.  Hess,  do  you  know  him?  Ever  seen 
him  around  there ?  A.  Don't  know  him. 

Q.  Do  you  know  a  janitor  by  the  name  of  P.  H. 
Everhart?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  A  janitor  by  the  name  of  Alonzo  Leath?  A. 
No,  sir. 

Q.  A  janitor  by  the  name  of  O.  A.  King?  A.  I 
know  Anthony  King. 

Q.    What  does  he  do?    A.     Janitor. 

Q.    Do  you  know  Sam  Taylor?    A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Ben  Simonton?  A.  I  just  got  ac- 
quainted. He  came  from  Chicago. 

Q.    Is  he  a  janitor?    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  know  Charles  Martin?    A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  a  janitor  by  the  name  of  George 
Groves?  A.  No,  sir. 

21 


Q.  Do  you  know  a  janitor  by  the  name  of  Peter  Mc- 
Donald? A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  a  janitor  by  the  name  of  Normiliel 
A.  No,  sir. 

According  to  Auditor  Brady's  report,  the  men  men- 
tioned are  down  as  janitors,  drawing  salaries  from  the 
State  for  work  in  the  House. 

In  my  practice  as  a  lawyer,  I  was  consulted  some 
six  years  back  by  a  man  who  was  on  the  House  payroll 
during  the  entire  session.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  he  told  me 
he  didn't  go  to  Springfield  but  twice  during  that  session 
—and  then  to  collect  his  warrants;  that  thereafter  he 
wrote  to  the  Auditor  to  send  him  his  warrants  and  the 
Auditor  told  him  they  had  been  cashed.  He  then  went  to 
Springfield  and  found  the  representative  who  had  so  gen- 
erously secured  his  appointment  had  cashed  all  the  rest 
of  his  pay  checks  and  kept  the  money.  He  consulted  me 
about  bringing  a  suit  against  the  State  or  against  the 
representative  for  his  money.  I  told  him  that  if  the 
State's  Attorney  or  Attorney-General  knew  his  story  he 
was  very  likely  to  go  to  the  penitentiary  and  the  repre- 
sentative with  him. 

In  former  days,  payroll-stuffing  has  been  the  custom, 
but  it  never  reached  such  a  limit  as  it  did  in  the  Senate 
in  1915.  Of  course,  no  one  actually  knew  before  the  pres- 
ent date  that  the  janitors  didn't  show  up  at  all.  This  is 
the  first  time  that  men  have  gone  under  oath  in  a  court 
proceeding  and  proof  has  been  offered  of  these  practices. 
The  eight  janitors  in  Senate  whom  Parker  claims  per- 
formed no  janitor  services  drew  from  the  State  Treasury 
$2,790.  In  the  House,  Curthis  received  $262.50  and  $105 
extra  pay;  Soci,  $277.50;  Hess,  $225;  Everhart,  $252.50; 
Simonton,  $322.50;  Martin,  $207.50;  Leath,  $90;  Nor- 
mile,  $70. 

The  modus  operandi  by  which  these  men  are  put  on 
the  payroll  is  through  the  executive  committee  and  jobs 
are  apportioned  according  to  the  PULL  which  the  indi- 
vidual senators  may  have. 

Sometimes  it  appeared  that  a  clerk  was  assigned  to 
a  committee  and  that  the  chairman  of  the  committee  never 

22 


saw  him  throughout  the  entire  session.  A  reputable 
senator  who  wasn't  in  the  fake  payroll  business  would  be 
put  out  to  find  that  the  clerk  to  his  committee  was  on  the 
payroll  without  showing  up.  An  instance  of  this  was  the 
committee  on  insurance.  Of  this  committee,  Cornwell 
was  chairman.  His  committee  clerk  was  one  George  Aus- 
tin. When  Cornwell  sought  to  call  his  committee  together 
he  hunted  his  clerk  and  couldn't  find  him.  Throughout 
the  entire  session  Senator  Cornwell  was  making  inquiries 
of  every  senator  concerning  the  whereabouts  of  George 
Austin.  He  asked  the  Lieutenant-Governor  and  his  clerks 
and  was  unable  to  find  anybody  who  had  ever  seen  George 
Austin.  It  then  occurred  to  him  Austin  would  sign  for 
his  warrant,  so  he  went  to  the  Auditor's  office  and  told 
the  Auditor  he  would  like  to  have  Austin  come  and  see 
him.  Cornwell  was  anxious  to  know  what  he  looked  like. 
This  had  no  results,  and  later,  during  the  session,  he 
again  applied  to  the  Auditor,  making  the  same  request. 
Senator  Cornwell  now  informs  me  he  never  saw  George 
Austin  throughout  the  entire  session.  However,  Austin 
appears  to  have  drawn  $261  as  a  committee  clerk  or 
secretary. 

On  May  26,  Senator  Ettelson  offered  Senate  Eesolu- 
tion  No.  60  (Sen.  Debates,  p.  717).  This  resolution  is 
quite  typical.  It  reads  as  follows : 

"Besolved,  That  Charles  F.  Trick  be  appointed  and 
he  is  hereby  appointed  Chief  Clerk  in  the  office  of  the 
Law  Secretary  of  the  Senate  at  a  per  diem  of  $6.00  per 
day,  to  date  from  April  5,  1915. 

"That  Frank  Oberman  is  appointed  bill  distributer 
at  $1.50  per  diem,  to  date  from  April  5,  1915 ;  that  Myrtle 
Murk  is  appointed  special  stenographer  at  $4.00  per  diem 
to  date  from  May  5,  1915 ;  that  Lou  Casey  is  hereby  al- 
lowed pay  as  page  from  the  day  of  his  appointment  at 
$1.50  per  diem,  less  the  amount  he  has  already  received." 

Testimony  of  Mr.  Herbert  shows  that  in  the  year 
1915  he  was  general  manager  of  the  Eex  Typewriter  Com- 
pany. 

"Q.     Do  you  know  Charles  F.  Trick?    A.    Yes,  sir. 


23 


' '  Q.  Did  lie  work  for  the  Rex  Typewriter  Company ! 
A.  He  did. 

"Q.  About  when  did  he  go  to  work  for  that  com- 
pany? A.  I  should  say  during  the  week  of  January  1, 
1915. 

' '  Q.  How  long  did  he  continue  in  the  employ  of  the 
company?  A.  Until  May  1,  1915." 

The  Bex  Typewriter  Company  was  located  in  the 
City  of  Chicago  and  in  addition  to  his  testimony  Mr. 
Herbert  produced  the  canceled  pay  checks  of  Mr. 'Charles 
F.  Trick  for  the  period  from  January  1,  1915,  to  May  1, 
1915. 

In  the  Senate  there  were  twenty-four  pages;  that 
is  to  say,  for  fifty-one  (51)  senators,  twenty-four  (24) 
boys  were  hired  to  carry  their  messages  from  their  desks 
to  the  clerk.  That  is  the  primary  duty  of  a  page.  A 
senator  offers  a  resolution  and  calls  a  page,  who  takes 
the  resolution  to  the  Clerk  of  the  Senate.  The  Senate 
Chamber  is  comparatively  small  and  the  distance  from 
some  of  the  senators  to  the  clerk's  desk  does  not  exceed 
four  feet.  Nevertheless,  it  was  necessary  to  employ  twen- 
ty-four pages  to  serve  the  fifty-one  men.  Now,  these 
pages  drew  a  total  salary  of  $3,933. 

Another  duty  which  the  pages  have  is  distributing 
the  printed  bills  on  the  senators'  desks  in  the  morning 
before  the  session.  Apparently  this  service  was  too  bur- 
densome for  the  twenty-four  pages  so  the  Senate  ap- 
pointed twelve  men,  who  are  called  bill  distributers.  These 
twelve  men  lightened  the  burdens  of  the  twenty-four 
pages  so  the  senators  were  abl6  to  receive  the  bills  on 
their  desks. 

The  law  makes  a  schedule  of  prices  for  the  services 
of  the  various  employes  of  the  House  and  Senate.  This 
is  known  as  the  Hurburgh  bill  and  was  introduced  and 
passed  at  a  time  when  Senators  Hurburgh,  Magill,  Jones 
and  Hay  had  redeemed  the  State  of  Illinois  and  defeated 
the  old  Senate  crowd.  At  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this 
bill  the  conditions  of  the  House  and  Senate  payroll  were 
thought  to  be  bad,  but  were,  in  fact,  about  half  as  bad 
as  at  the  present  time.  This  particular  enactment  which 

24 


is  on  the  statute  books  specifies  that  the  various  em- 
ployes shall  receive  their  pay  for  each  legislative  day. 
Now,  Sunday  is  not  a  legislative  day.  If  it  is  a  legisla- 
tive day,  then  the  various  adjournments  by  the  House 
and  Senate  have  been  unconstitutional,  because  the  Con- 
stitution prescribes  just  how  long  a  single  house  may 
adjourn. 

It  has  always  been  considered  that  Sunday  is  not  a 
legislative  day.  Nevertheless,  clerks,  stenographers, 
pages,  policemen,  ventilators,  janitors — in  fact,  the  entire 
payroll  charged  up  throughout  the  session  for  Sundays. 
They  likewise  charged  up  for  days  when  the  Legislature 
was  not  in  session  and  a  large  number  of  them  secured 
twenty  days'  additional  time  after  the  session  had  ad- 
journed sine  die  and  in  addition  to  that  the  good-natured 
and  kindly  Senate  and  House  passed  resolutions  which 
gave  bonuses  to  the  various  men.  These  bonuses  some- 
times ran  up  as  high  as  $500. 

This  is  not  all.  In  addition  to  the  foregoing,  it 
would  be  found  that  extra  employes  had  been  serving  the 
State  unbeknown  to  the  senators  and,  of  course,  it  would 
be  unjust  that  these  various  persons  should  go  without 
remuneration.  Therefore,  their  names  were  discovered 
and  the  last  few  days  resolutions  were  passed  paying 
these  various  parties  in  a  lump  sum  for  the  months  of 
service  which  they  had  performed.  An  illustration  of 
this  is  George  F.  Campbell.  Now,  Mr.  Campbell  testi- 
fied on  July  11,  1916.  It  seems  that  he  is  regularly  em- 
ployed and  has  been  for  the  last  three  years  as  house  de- 
tective of  the  Leland  Hotel  in  Springfield.  Mr.  Camp- 
bell— an  affable  gentleman — stated  that  he  had  lost  no 
time  in  his  hotel  employment  during  the  past  three  years ; 
that  he  goes  on  duty  at  six  o'clock  in  the  evening  and 
works  until  five  o'clock  each  morning.  When  asked  if  he 
did  any  work  for  the  State  he  said  he  was  an  enrolling 
and  engrossing  clerk  in  the  Senate  and  that  he  was  paid 
$388. 

As  to  the  time  during  which  he  did  his  work  in  the 
Senate,  he  stated  he  went  to  work  at  nine-thirty  o'clock 
in  the  morning  and  worked  until  six  in  the  evening;  that 

25 


he  performed  his  services  regularly  from  the  time  he  went 
to  work  until  the  end  of  the  session ;  that  he  received  $4.00 
a  day.  When  asked  about  his  sleep,  he  stated  he  got 
home  at  10  minutes  past  five  a.  m.  and  got  up  at  eight  a. 
m.  and  that  it  was  a  regular  thing  during  the  session. 

An  interesting  series  of  items  appears  among  the 
legislative  vouchers,  namely,  the  personal  expense  ac- 
counts of  employes.  The  statute  under  which  they  are 
employed  makes  no  provision  for  any  expense  accounts. 
It  would  be  ridiculous  for  them  to  have  expense  accounts 
because  of  the  fact  all  their  supplies  are  furnished  by  the 
Secretary  of  State.  At  the  beginning  of  the  session  an 
appropriation  is  made  to  this  official  and  he  is  authorized 
to  purchase  the  necessary  supplies.  This  includes  type- 
writer paper  and  typewriter  supplies  for  the  various  com- 
mittees*. In  fact,  it  includes  all  the  normal,  necessary 
expense  which  the  Senate  as  a  whole  or  its  committees 
as  a  whole  should  have. 

Nevertheless,  a  large  number  of  employes,  according 
to  their  statements,  on  their  own  initiative,  purchased 
lunches  and  supplies  for  senators,  for  which  they  were  re- 
imbursed. Without  attempting  to  go  into  the  detail  of 
this  particular  practice,  an  instance  or  two  may  suffice. 
In  the  chapter  entitled,  "The  $10,000  Matter,"  appears 
the  name  C.  S.  Close.  Mr.  Close  appeared  before  the 
Master  on  July  10, 1915,  was  sworn  and  testified  that  since 
June  30,  1915,  he  had  been  regularly  employed  by  the 
State  as  Janitor  to  the  Lieutenant-Governor  at  $2.00  a 
day.  Ben  Savage,  who  previously  occupied  this  position, 
testified  his  duties  between  sessions  were  to  take  care  of 
the  one  room  occupied  by  the  Lieutenant-Governor ;  that 
there  would  be  periods  of  a  month  at  least  when  the  Lieu- 
tenant-Governor would  not  appear  at  Springfield,  dur- 
ing which  time  he  very  carefully  dusted  the  desk,  picked 
up  the  papers  and  otherwise  cleaned  the  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor's room.  Those  were  his  entire  duties.  Now,  Close 
has  been  engaged  in  this  position  since  the  adjournment 
on  June  30,  1915.  Up  to  January  1,  he  had  no  connec- 
tion with  the  State  of  Illinois,  but  between  January  1  and 
June  30, 1915,  he  drew  out  of  the  State  Treasury  $2,265.60. 

26 


One  of  these  items  is  for  incidental  expenses,  which 
amounted  to  $564.90.  As  to  what  made  up  this  sum  of 
money,  he  testified  he  bought  newspapers  for  the  sena- 
tors; that  he  purchased  lunches  for  the  senators  and 
paid  out  small  items  of  $1.00  or  $2.00  a  day;  that  he 
kept  the  items  on  a  spindle,  which  he  had  since  lost  or 
destroyed.  Questioned  as  to  what  senator  he  bought 
lunches  for,  he  couldn't  state.  His  testimony  was  very 
indefinite  on  his  expenditure  of  this  amount  of  money 
and  is  as  follows: 

Q.  I  notice  on  page  eighteen  of  the  report  which  I 
have  recently  referred  to,  that  there  is  an  item  paid  to 
you  of  $25.50  for  traveling  expenses.  Did  you  get  that 
money? 

A.    Have  you  got  the  voucher  there  I 

Q.  I  am  referring  to  this  printed  report,  which  says 
C.  S.  Close,  amount  paid  for  traveling  expenses,  $25.50? 

A.     I  don't  remember  whether  I  did  or  not. 

Q.  Would  it  help  you  out  any  if  you  saw  the 
voucher  ? 

A.     It  might  come  to  my  memory. 

Q.  Now,  on  the  same  page,  18,  there  appears  C.  S. 
Close,  amount  paid  for  incidental  expenses,  $564.90.  Did 
you  get  that  money? 

A.    I  believe  I  got  that  voucher,  sir. 

Q.    What  was  that  for? 

A.  Well,  that  practically  covered  five  months '  work 
in  the  office  and  incidentals. 

Q.    You  mean  your  salary  for  five  months'  work? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     What  did  it  cover? 

A.     That  was  incidental  expenses  that  was  paid  out. 

Q.    By  you? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     On  State  affairs? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    What  was  the  nature  of  the  incidental  expenses'? 

A.  Well,  I  just  don't  believe — the  expense  is  so 
large — that  I  can  recall  what  they  were,  the  various  ones. 
At  different  times  newspapers  were  bought,  lunches  were 

27 


bought,  telegrams  were  bought  and  postage  was  bought, 
and  I  kept  an  account  of  that. 

Q.     Did  you  keep  an  itemized  account  of  each  one? 

A.  I  don't  remember  whether  I  did  or  not.  They 
were  coming  in  every  day,  probably  a  dollar  or  two  dol- 
lars a  day,  and  just  simply  came  up  that  way. 

Q.     The  newspapers,  were  they  for  yourself  I 

A.  They  were  for  all  of  the  senators  and  for  the 
office. 

Q.  Did  the  senators  ask  you  to  buy  newspapers  for 
them? 

A.    I  got  the  papers  for  them. 

Q.     The  lunches,  who  were  they  for? 

A.    Well,  they  were  for  everybody,  I  guess. 

Q.    Where  did  you  get  them? 

A.  Got  them  upstairs  sometimes  and  sometimes  over 
at  the  Pan- American  when  we  worked  nights. 

Q.    Were  those  the  lunches  for  the  senators? 

A.    I  believe  they  were. 

Q.  Senators  asked  you  to  go  out  and  buy  lunches 
for  them! 

A.     I  believe  they  did. 

Q.  What  senators  asked  you  to  buy  lunches  for 
them? 

A.    I  could  not  tell  you  that  now. 

Q.    Can  you  name  one? 

A.    No,  I  don't  believe  I  can. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  of  ever  getting  any  lunch  for 
any  particular  senator? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.    You  can't  recall  that? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Ever  buy  any  sandwiches  for  any  senator? 

A.    I  probably  did. 

Q.     Do  you  remember  any  particular  one? 

A.    No,  sir. 

28 


Q.    Were  the  lunches  for  anybody  else  except  sena- 
tors? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Now,  this  only  occurred,  you  say,  during  the 
night  sessions? 

A.     Different  times ;  yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  mean  you  bought  lunches  during  regular 
sessions? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    When  did  the  night  sessions  start? 

A.    I  don't  remember  that  now. 

Q.    About  how  many  night  sessions  were  there  ? 

A.    I  don't  remember  that  neither. 

Q.     Now,   you    have    mentioned    newspapers    and 
lunches,  what  else  were  these  incidental  expenses  for  ?' 

A.    For  various  things  that  came  up ;  I  just  can't  tell 
you  what  they  were. 

Q.     But  you  advanced  out  of  your  own  pocket  this 
sum  of  $564.90  for  State  expenses  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Now,  you  say  it  would  average  one  or  two  dol- 
lars a  day? 

A.    I  just  cannot  tell  you  what  it  was ;  I  mentioned 
one  or  two  dollars — it  might  have  been  less. 

Q.     Have  you  got  the  spindle  with  those  items  on  it? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  have  not. 

Q.    What  did  you  do  with  them? 

A.     As  they  came  in  I  just  simply    marked    them 
down  and  after  the  session  was  over  we  put  them  away. 

Q.    You  just  kept  advancing  this  money  until  it 
got  to  be  $564.90,  keeping  track  of  it ;  is  that  right  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Did  you  keep  any  bank  account  at  that  time  ? 

A.    My  own  private  bank  account. 

Q.    Where  did  you  keep  that? 

A.    In  the  bank. 
Q.    In  Springfield? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    What  bank? 

A.     Sangamon  Loan. 


Q.  Did  you  deposit  the  check  of  $564.90  when  you 
got  it? 

A.     I  don't  remember  whether  I  did  or  not. 

Q.  You  remember  how  you  cashed  it,  whether  you 
got  it  from  the  State  Treasurer,  a  Treasurer's  check,  or 
did  you  cash  it  in  currency? 

A.    Well,  that  I  canijot  just  recall. 

Q.  Now  I  have  mentioned  your  salary  as  messenger 
to  the  Senate  and  your  extra  services  on  the  educational 
committee,  and  your  expense  account.  Did  you  draw  any 
other  money  from  the  State  during  that  period? 

A.     I  don't  know  whether  I  did  or  not. 

Q.     You  don 't  remember  it  ? 

A.     I  might  as  we  go  on. 

Q.    You  got  twenty  days'  extra  pay,  didn't  you? 

A.     I  believe  I  did,  sir. 

Q.     What  was  that  for? 

A.  I  suppose  if  you  will  look  in  the  record  you  will 
find  out. 

Q.     You  are  testifying? 

A.     It  is  a  matter  of  record,  that  is  all  I  know. 

Q.     There  is  no  record  of  the  work  you  did,  is  there  ? 

A.     Only  by  resolution  of  the  Senate. 

Q.  I  am  not  talking  about  that,  I  am  asking  you 
what  services  you  performed? 

A.  Finishing  up  and  taking  care  of  the  bills  in  the 
office  as  they  came  in. 

Q.     That  was  after  June  30th,  1915? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Twenty  days  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  During  the  same  period  of  time  you  were  draw- 
ing a  salary  as  a  clerk  in  Mr.  O'Hara's  office? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

So  much  for  Senate  methods. 

While  in  the  House  there  may  have  been  employes 
whose  names  appeared  upon  the  payroll  and  toiled  not ;  it 
was  with  considerable  difficulty  that  resolutions  were 
passed  approving  of  such  transactions.  This  is  indicated 
by  a  debate  between  the  Speaker  and  Lee  0  'Neil  Browne. 

so 


It  appears  in  the  volume  entitled  ' '  HOUSE  DEBATES, ' ' 
on  page  291,  and  is  as  follows : 

"THE  SPEAKER :  Do  you  want  a  roll  call  on  this 
proposition!  If  the  members  of  the  House  want  to  add 
to  the  payroll  I  will  insist  that  they  go  on  record.  Bead 
the  report  so  that  the  members  will  know  what  they  are 
doing. ' ' 

"THE  SPEAKER:  The  House  will  be  in  order.  I 
desire  to  state  this  for  the  information  of  the  House.  The 
chair  stated  that  he  would  not  pad  the  payroll  of  this 
House,  and  the  chair  desires  to  say  now  that  he  will  never 
certify  any  amount  for  back  pay  for  any  man  who  has 
not  performed  proper  service  for  that  pay,  and  the  chair 
knows  that  these  men  have  not  performed  any  duties  for 
which  they  should  be  paid.  It  is  a  raid  on  the  treasury 
and  if  this  House  wants  to  do  it  and  have  its  clerk  certify 
to  it,  it  can  do  so,  but  the  Speaker  will  refuse  to  do  it. ' ' 

"MR.  BROWNE  (La  Salle) :  I  know,  personally,  that 
Jesse  Hawkins  has  been  on  the  job  from  the  time  this 
session  opened.  I  know  he  has  performed  his  service 
willingly  and  has  worked  hard.  I  know  he  has  done  it 
just  as  faithfully  as  he  could  do  it,  and  the  Speaker  knows 
it,  and  every  member  of  this  House  knows  it. ' ' 

"THE  SPEAKER:  I  will  ask  the  gentleman  from 
La  Salle  (Browne)  what  duties  he  performed  and  who 
directed  him  to  perform  them!" 

"MR.  BROWNE  (La  Salle):  I  don't  care  what 
duties  he  performed  or  who  told  him  to,  he  has  performed 
them  as  House  messenger  for  everyone  in  this  House." 

"THE  SPEAKER:  The  chair  desires  to  state  that 
thohe  men  who  are  supposed  to  be  doing  work  and  are 
not  on  the  payroll  have  not  performed  any  duties  other 
than  those  which  they  desired  to  perform  themselves.  If 
anybody  here  is  trying  to  embarrass  the  chair  regarding 
the  padding  of  the  payroll,  they  will  find  they  are  mis- 
taken. There  are  more  men  on  the  payroll  now  for  cer- 
tain places  than  are  needed." 

"MR.  BROWNE  (La  Salle):  I  assume  that  the 
Speaker  of  this  House  is  not  going  to  try  to  set  at  naught 
the  will  of  this  House. ' ' 

31 


' '  THE  SPEAKER :    Absolutely  not. ' ' 

"MB.  BROWNE  (La  Salle) :  If  this  House  votes 
this  thing  down,  well  and  good,  but  if  it  votes  it  up,  you 
have  no  right  to  say  you  will  not  certify  it." 

' '  THE  SPEAKER :  I  will  not  swear  to  what  I  know 
is  not  so." 

"MR.  BROWNE  (La  Salle):  You  don't  have  to 
swear  to  anything. ' ' 

"THE  SPEAKER:  You  or  no  other  member  of 
this  House  will  get  me  to  certify  back  pay  for  any  man 
who  didn't  earn  it.  If  the  House  wants  to  do  it,  the  clerk 
will  have  to  certify  to  it,  but  the  Speaker  will  not  do  it." 

MR.  BROWNE  (La  Salle) :  If  this  House  votes  for 
it  and  passes  it,  I  think  you  will." 

' < THE  SPEAKER :  And  the  chair  thinks  it  will  not. 
The  question  is  upon  the  report  of  the  Contingent  Ex- 
pense Committee,  reporting  back  these  resolutions  with 
the  recommendation  that  they  do  not  pass.  Upon  that 
question  the  clerk  will  call  the  roll. ' ' 

' '  THE  SPEAKER :  The  question  is  on  the  adoption 
of  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Contingent  Expenses, 
reporting  these  resolutions  back  with  the  recommenda- 
tion that  they  do  not  pass,  and  that  the  men  be  not  added 
to  the  payroll.  The  clerk  will  call  the  roll.  (Roll  called 
by  clerk.) 

•' '  THE  SPEAKER :  On  this  question  the  « yeas '  are 
86  and  the  'nays'  are  30.  The  report  of  the  committee 
is  adopted." 

The  resolution  read  as  follows : 

"WHEREAS,  A.  W.  Schevers  has  worked  faithfully, 
performing  duties  as  Assistant  Messenger  of  the  House ; 
therefore,  be  it 

"RESOLVED,  That  he  be  selected  by  the  House  of 
Representatives  as  Assistant  Messenger,  at  a  per  diem 
of  $4.00,  and,  be  it  further 

"RESOLVED,  That  he  be  paid  at  said  per  diem 
from  and  including  February  18,  the  date  of  organiza- 
tion of  the  House." 

32 


Eighty 
resolution, 

Browne,  L. 

Butler 

Conlon 

Dalton 

Desmond 

Donlan 

Epstein 

Fahy 

Fieldstack 

Foster 


-six  members  of  the  House  stood  against  this 
but  the  following  went  on  record  for  it : 


O'Neil  Franz 
Gorman 
Graham,  T.  E. 
Griffin 
Hennebry 
Hilton 
Hoffman 
Jacobson 
Lipshulch 
McGloon 


Mitchell 
Morris 
O'Connell 
Ryan,  Frank 
Evan.  F.  J. 
Eyan^  J.  W. 
Santry 
Seif 
Smith 
Wilson,  E.  E. 


33 


JOY  BIDING  ON  THE  STATE. 

Each  General  Assembly  of  the  State  of  Illinois  is 
authorized  to  appoint  three  committees,  known  as— 

Committee  to  Visit  State  Charitable  Institutions ; 

Committee  to  Visit  State  Penal  and  Keformatory 
Institutions ; 

Committee  to  Visit  State  Educational  Institutions. 

The  statute  which  creates  these  committees  limits 
their  members  to  seven:  two  from  the  Senate  and  five 
from  the  House. 

The  second  section  of  the  law  which  creates  these 
committees  reads  as  follows : 

"The  members  of  such  committees  shall  also  report 
their  actual  expenses  incurred  in  the  discharge  of  their 
said  duties  and  the  same  shall  be  allowed  and  paid,  but 
no  committees  or  members  of  committees  out  of  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly  shall  receive  any  pay  for  services  ren- 
dered or  for  expenses  incurred  in  visiting  said  State 
Institutions  otherwise  than  as  provided  by  this  Act." 

In  1915,  the  following  members  were  appointed : 

Committee  to  Visit  Charitable  Institutions: 

(House)  Foster,  Chairman;  Campbell,  Vickers,  Grif- 
fin and  Elliott. 
(Senate)  Abt,  Chairman;  Latham  and  Boehm. 

Committee  to   Visit  Educational  Institutions: 

(House)    Hilton,   Chairman;  Flagg,   Barker,  Pace 

and  Ryan. 
(Senate)     Latham,     Chairman;     Bardill,     Carroll, 

Meeker. 

Committee  to  Visit  Penal  Institutions 

(House)  Ryan,  F.  J.,  Chairman;  Atwood,  Graham, 

T.  E.,  Gregory,  Donlan. 
(Senate)      Jewell,   Chairman;   Franklin,   Hamilton, 

Campbell,  Tossey. 

34 


In  1913  the  expenses  of  these  committees  were' as 
follows : 

William  P.  Holaday — Expenses  Joint  Committee  visiting 

Charitable  Institutions $  674.70 

Joseph  Carter — Expenses  House  Committee  visiting 

Educational  Institutions  454.13 

John  R.  Hamilton — Expenses  Senate  Committee  visiting 

Educational  Institutions  219.57 

W.  H.  Hoffman — Expenses  House  Committee  visiting 

Penal  Institutions  262.00 

F.  Jeff  Tossey — Expenses  Senate  Committee  visiting 

Penal   Institutions  197.25 


Total   $1,807.65 

•In  1915  a  voucher  was  issued  and  paid,  as  follows: 
Voucher  No.  72530. 

Senator  Sam  Latham. 

To  expenses  incurred  by  Committee  appointed  to  visit  State  edu- 
cational institutions. 

Expended  by  Latham  and  Hilton $3,131.65 

Expended  by  Close 10.00 

Expended  by  Meeker 12.32 

Due  Beardsley  Hotel 39.75 

Expended  by  Senator  Carroll. 104.15 

Due  Weston   27.53 

Representative  Pace   26.00 


$3,351.40 
Voucher  No.  72,565  reads,  in  part,  as  follows: 

Chicago  &  Alton  Railroad, 
Traffic  Department. 

Merle  W.  Dancy,  May  24,  1915. 

Passenger  &  Ticket  Agt.,  Springfield. 

To  the  Committee  on  Educational  Institutions,  49th  Gen- 
eral Assembly,  Springfield,  Illinois. 

Gentlemen : 

I  give  you  herewith  statement  of  transportation  fur- 
nished for  your  trip  of  inspection  to  the  educational  in- 
stitutions of  the  State. 

35 


No.  of 

From  — 

To- 

Via. 

Pass. 

Rate 

Amt. 

Springfield 

Normal 

C.  &  A. 

40 

.... 

$      50.00 

Normal 

Chicago 

C.  &  A. 

46 

2.48 

114.08 

Chicago 

DeKalb&ret. 

C.  &  N.  W. 

48 

2.32 

111.36 

Chicago 

Macomb 

C.B.&Q. 

48 

4.04 

193.92 

Macomb 

St.  Louis 

C.  B.  &  Q. 

48 

4.16 

199.68 

St.  Louis 

Carbondale 

111.  Cent. 

50 

2.55 

127.50 

Carbondale 

Mattoon 

111.  Cent. 

47 

2.72 

127.84 

Mattoon 

Charleston 

Big  Four 

48 

.... 

50.00 

Charleston 

Mattoon 

Big  Four 

49 

.... 

50.00 

Mattoon 

Champaign 

111.  Cent. 

47 

.... 

50.00 

Champaign 

Eldorado 

111.  Cent. 

6 

3.57 

21.43 

Champaign 

Chicago 

111.  Cent. 

18 

3.40 

61.42 

Total 

$1,157.00 

Due  Pullman  Company  for  cars  Strelna  and  Laertes,  8y2 

days  at  $45  per  car  per  day 765.00 


Total   $1,922.00 

It  therefore  appears  that  the  entire  expenses  of  this 
committee  amounted  to  $5,273.40. 

This  may  be  explained  by  the  testimony  of  Chair- 
man Hilton,  whose  fame  as  a  boxing  devotee  is  well 
known,  which,  in  part,  is  as  follows: 

Q.  I  see  there  are  mentioned  here  two  special  cars? 
A.  We  had  two  special  cars.  Well,  I  don't  know,  but 
I  suppose  we  did  have  to  have  one,  and  we  had  such  a 
big  committee — we  had  a  large  car  and  a  small  car. 

Q.  You  speak  of  a  big  committee.  The  regular  com- 
mittee was  how  many?  A.  Five  from  the  House  and 
five  from  the  Senate,  including  their  families. 

Q.  Did  they  have  their  families  with  them?  A. 
Yes,  their  families  were  all  there. 

Q.  Anybody  else,  Mr.  Hilton?  A.  Well,  now,  I 
could  not  say  as  to  that.  Everybody  was  introduced  there 
as  "  So  and  So 's  wife "  or  "  So  and  So 's  brother  "  or  "  So 
and  So 's  sister. "  There  was  a  large  committee.  I  would 
say  60  or  61  or  62. 

Q.  Now  in  the  various  places  where  you  came,  did 
you  sleep  in  the  cars  ?  Were  they  sleeping  cars,  in  other 
words  ? 

36 


A.  The  most  of  the  committee  did  not  sleep  on  the 
cars  all  the  time. 

Q.  But  as  a  general  rule  that  was  the  purpose  of 
the  cars,  so  that  when  you  got  to  a  town  you  could  stay 
over  night  in  the  cars?  A.  If  they  wanted  to,  they  could 
go  to  a  hotel  and  stay  there  if  they  saw  fit,  and  they  put 
in  their  bill,  and  it  would  be  paid. 

Q.  I  notice  that  Mr.  Latham  puts  in  a  bill  of 
$3,131.65,  and  then  also  some  individuals.  Do  you  care 
to  see  that,  Mr.  Hilton?  Those  are  the  bills.  (Handing 
papers  to  witness.)  Was  that  first  item,  $3,131.65,  divided, 
or  did  Mr.  Latham  spend  that  money  ?  A.  No,  we  depos- 
ited some  money,  some  of  the  money  in  a  Springfield  bank 
and  took  some  with  us,  and  we  paid  in  checks  all  the  big 
items,  except  small  items  of  refreshment  for  the  ladies 
and  children ;  candies  and  lunches  and  stuff  of  that  kind. 
I  paid  it  in  cash,  and  where  we  would  go  and  get  a  little 
time  the  party  would  be  split,  and  they  would  have  to 
come  back,  and  they  might  hire  a  taxi  or  automobile  to 
come  back  to  the  car  or  something,  and  we  would  have  to 
settle  for  that. 

Q.  Was  it  the  Eidgley  Bank  in  Springfield  that  you 
had  reference  to  ?  A.  I  think  it  was. 

Q.  Now,  as  I  understand  you  now,  in  paying  this 
money  out  you  did  not  confine  it  to  members  of  the  com- 
mittee, but  that  was  to  anybody  that  was  along  with  you? 
A.  The  committee  and  their  families.  We  had,  of  course 
— we  had,  I  think,  two  or  three  pages  and  we  had  them 
to  come  along,  they  helped  the  women  folks  in  different 

places. 

#         *         #         * 

Q.  Now,  at  the  various  institutions  like  the  Normal 
School,  were  you  not  entertained  by  the  schools  1  A.  Well, 
yes,  but  in  regards  to  eating,  the  folks  did  not  like  to 
hardly  eat  at  these  chairs,  you  know,  with  the  arms  on  like 
Thompson's  restaurant — some  of  the  women  folks  did  not 
like  to,  and  some  of  the  men  folks,  and  they  would  want 
to  go  out  and  look  up  a  good  restaurant  and  have  a  meal. 

Q.  In  the  entertainment  at  the  University,  didn't 
they  make  provision  for  giving  you  some  meals  ?  A.  If 

37 


anyone  wanted  to  take  them,  yes ;  but  there  was  not  very 
many  wanted  to  eat  them  because— 

Q.  Often  they  preferred  to  go  to  restaurants?  A. 
Yes,  sir,  because  you  sat  in  there  with  all  the  students, 
you  know,  and  there  was  several  of  the  committee  that 
was  on  that  committee  before,  two  years  before,  and  they 
knew  the  conditions,  and  they  wanted — they  went  to  a 

hotel  and  had  it  charged  up. 

*  *         *         * 

Q.  The  committee  was  composed  of  nine  members, 
according  to  this  report  that  I  have  here,  of  Mr.  Latham's, 
and  were  out  seven  days.  Now  the  additional  number,  do 
you  say,  were  the  members  of  the  families  of  the  com- 
mittee— 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  the  pages —  A.  Well,  there  was  not  only 
three  pages.  There  might  have  been  four  at  one  time,  but 
I  know  I  went — at  the  Alton  depot  at  Springfield  there 
was  10  or  15  pages,  and  I  told  them  they  could  not  come 
along,  it  was  too  crowded.  I  believe  there  was  not  over 
three  or  four  pages  at  any  time.  There  might  have  been 
four,  I  won't  say;  but  every  page  over  there  likes  to  go 
on  them  trips,  you  know,  and  you  don't  like  to  chase  the 
boys  away,  but  I  told  them  we  could  not  take  them  and 
we  only  took  one  or  two  from  the  House. 

Q.  I  see  you  had  Close.  Do  you  remember  seeing 
him?  He  is  down  here  for  $10.  A.  That  is  something 
that  he  must  have  gotten  away  from  the  party  and  had  to 
get  back  or  something,  and  put  in  his  bill  for  $10 ;  every- 
thing was  itemized. 

Q.  Was  the  $3,131.65  itemized?  A.  I  believe  it 
was,  dollar  for  dollar,  and  I  think  we  were  owing  $104 
or  something  about  that  amount  after  everything  was 

settled  up  that  members  had  put  in  for. 

*  *         *         * 

Q.  You  stopped  over  in  Chicago  for  a  couple  of 
days  in  between  trips?  A.  Yes,  sir,  at  the  Hotel  La 
Salle. 

Q.  Did  the  whole  party  go  to  the  La  Salle?  A. 
Mostly  all  of  them,  they  all  went  to  the  La  Salle. 

38 


Q.  Were  Flagg,  Barker,  Pace  and  Senators  Bardell 
and  Meeker  on  the  trip?  A.  That  little  Frank?  Yes,  he 
was  with  us  all  the  time.  He  was  there  and  his  brother 
or  someone  else. 

Q.     Pace?    A.    Yes. 

Q.     Barker?    A.    Yes. 

Q.     Flagg?    A.    Yes. 

Q.  And  Senator  Meeker?  A.  Yes,  Senator  Meeker 
was  there. 

Q.     Senator  Bardill?    A.    Yes. 

Q.     Senator  Carroll?    A.     Senator  Carroll. 

Q.  Were  you  with  the  committee  that  went  to  Mr. 
Russell  to  get  the  advance  of  the  $3,000.  A.  Yes. 

Q.  Did  Mr.  Russell  object  to  paying  out  that  money 
at  first?  A.  No,  I  don't  think  he  did. 

Q.  Was  anything  said  at  that  time  about  the  neces- 
sity of  having  a  large  sum  of  money  because  they  were 
to  pay  the  carfare?  A.  No — carfare,  I  don't  believe 
that  was  mentioned.  I  don't  remember  it  ever  being  men- 
tioned. .; 

Q.     They  simply  asked  for  $3,000.    A.    Yes. 

Q.  You  say  he  did  not  object  to  it?  A.  Not  to  my, 
knowledge.  I  cannot  say,  but  right  now  I  would  say  that 
he  did  not  object,  and  I  do  not  think  he  objected. 


Mr.  Russell  has  testified  it  was  customary  to  advance 
moneys  to  these  committees,  and  that  the  entire  commit- 
tee called  on  him  and  requested  $3,000.00;  that  he  ad- 
vanced the  sum  of  $3,000.00  out  of  his  personal  funds. 

The  committee  to  investigate  charitable  institutions 
presented  two  vouchers,  as  follows : 

Voucher  No.  72629. 

State  of  Illinois  to  A.  M.  Foster. 

Expenses  incurred  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  investigating 
charitable  institutions  of  the  State,  April  15  to  April  27. 

Eeceived  in  connection  with  Senator  Abt  from  State  Treasury 
starting  on  trip,  $1,200,  of  which  $752.67  was  used  as  House 
appropriation. 

39 


Hotel,  meals,  etc $  666.50 

Extra  railroad  fare 52.50 

Automobile  hire 93.00 

Eepresentative  Griffin,  personal  expenses 55.00 

Representative  Vickers,  personal  expenses 59.00 

Mr.  Weston's  expenses 22.75 

Thomas  O'Connor 44.25 

Incidentals    .  154.25 


Total   $1,147.25 

Amount  received  . ,       752.67 


Balance  due   $    394.58 

0.  K.  A.  M.  Foster,  Chairman, 

O.K.  Boyer, 

0.  K.  D.  E.  S.  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  73146. 

To  Senate  in  favor  of  Paul  W.  Abt,  Chairman,  Senate 
Committee  on  Charitable  Institutions. 

To  meals  and  hotel  bills  for  Senate  members  on  investigat- 
ing tour  of  said  institutions $375.00 

For  automobiles,  boat  fares  and  checking  baggage 75.00 

For  incidentals,  telegrams,  telephones,  etc 139.25 


Total    $589.25 

Approved:   Abt,  Chairman;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.-Gov. 

By  reference  to  Voucher  No.  72565,  it  appears  that 
there  were  from  twenty-one  to  forty  members  who  accom- 
panied this  committee;  that  they  had  one  Pullman  car. 
The  total  amount  of  the  voucher  is  $1,734.58.  Upon  this 
voucher  appears  the  item :  Chicago  to  Dunning,  30  pas- 
sengers, special  train,  $75.00. 

A  witness  connected  with  the  State  Department,  who 
had  charge  of  this  trip,  has  testified  that  the  trip  was 
arranged  in  the  Public  Utilities  Commission,  and,  through 
an  oversight,  the  special  train  ordered  from  Chicago  to 
Dunning  was  started  at  an  honr  which  was  inconvenient 
for  the  members,  and  that  in  consequence  he,  alone,  rode 
in  the  special  train  from  Chicago  to  Dunning  and  return. 
The  members  of  the  committee  and  their  friends  took 
automobiles  and  drove  from  Chicago  to  Dunning  and 
return. 

40 


The  committee  to  visit  the  penal  institutions  made 
out  the  following  vouchers : 
Voucher  No.  72550. 

Expenses,  being  money  paid  out  by  W.  S.  Jewel,  Chairman  Sena- 
torial Committee,  to  visit  State  Penal  and  Reformatory  Insti- 
tutions. 

Paid  by  check  to  F.  J.  Evan,  House  Chairman  of  said  Com- 
mittee, to  apply  on  expenses $  31.38 

To  Chicago  &  Alton  R.  R.  Co.  by  meals 4.25 

To  Hotel  La  Salle,  Chicago,  hotel  expenses  for  party 128.91 

To  M.  A.  Franklin,  Member  of  Committee,  expenses 19.50 

To  A.  B.  Taft,  employe,  expenses 12.00 

To  F.  E.  Campbell,  Member  of  Committee 31.36 

To  meals 73.40 

To  amount  paid  out  in  cash,  railroad  expenses,  cab  fare,  hotel 

bills  and  incidental  expenses 211.45 

Total $512.25 

Payable,  out  of  Committee  expense,  etc.     Barratt  O'Hara,  W.   S. 

Jewel  (Chairman),  Penal  Visiting  Com. 
Voucher  No.  72582. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Frank  J.  Ryan,  Dr. 
Statement  of  expenses  incurred  by  Frank  J.  Ryan,  Chairman  of 

Committee  on  visiting  penal  institutions,  on  trip  from  April 

29  to  May  3,  inclusive. 

To  expenses  St.  Louis  going $125.00 

To  expenses  St.  Louis  returning 113.50 

To  meals  on  dining  car 39.50 

To  expenses  at  Hotel  La  Salle  and  other  expenses 223.00 

To  meals  on'dining  car  en  route  to  Chicago 32.50 

To  incidental  expenses  of  Mr.  Gregory   10.00 

To  incidental  expenses  of  Mr.  Atwood 2.50 

To  incidental  expenses  of  Mr.  F.  Sullivan 10.00 

To  incidental  expenses  of  Mr.  Donnevan,  Clk 5.00 

To  porterage  on  trains 25.00 

Total $586.00 

0.  K.,  Frank  J.  Ryan,  Chairman  of  Com. 
0.  K.,  Thomas  A.  Boyer. 
0.  K.,  D.  E.  S.  Speaker. 

By  reference  to  the  bill  of  the  Chicago  &  Alton  Rail- 
road, it  appears  that  this  committee  reached  forty  mem- 
bers, and  that  they  had  one  special  car,  the  total  bill 
amounting  to  $804.90. 

It  will  thus  be  seen,  by  adding  up  the  expenses  of  the 
three  committees,  that  in  1915  there  was  spent  $11,094.96, 
as  against  $1,807.65  in  1913. 

41 


The  members  of  the  Legislature  presented  bills  for 
hotels,  railroad  fare,  taxicabs,  automobiles  and  incidental 
expenses.  One  item,  however,  was  not  overlooked,  and 
that  was  the  giving  of  tips  for  personal  service. 

One  member  of  the  General  Assembly  handed  out 
$25.00  (see  Voucher  No.  72582),  and  the  Waterway  Com- 
mittee presented  to  the  Auditor  and  Treasurer  for  settle- 
ment a  bill,  shown  as  Voucher  No.  72576,  which  is  as 
follows : 

Voucher  No.  72576. 

Statement  of  the  money  expended  on  account  of  expenses  of  the 
Waterway  Committee  on  April  8  to  11,  1915,  inclusive,  while 
engaged  in  tour  of  inspection  of  the  proposed  waterway  from 
Joliet  to  Peoria,  as  follows: 

April  8,  1915 — Fee  to  Pullman  porter  for  handling  bag- 
gage, etc.,  Springfield  to  Joliet $  10.00 

Fee  to  waiters  for  serving  meal  during 

trip  from  Springfield  to  Joliet 10.00 

Caring  for  baggage  at  Joliet 10.00 

April     9,  1915 — Fee  to  waiters  for  breakfast  at  Joliet...     10.00 
Fee  to  waiters  for  serving  •  dinner  at  Ot- 
tawa       10.00 

April  10,  1915 — Fee  to  waiters  for  serving  breakfast  at  Ot- 
tawa    10.00 

Caring  for  baggage  at  Ottawa  and  La  Salle       8.00 
Railroad  fare,  16  members  of  Committee, 

Peoria  to  La  Salle 32.00 

Lunch    for    members    of    Committee    at 

Peoria 10.00 

Fee   to   employes   on   boat,   La   Salle   to 

Peoria ." 10.00 

April  10  &  11 — Hotel  accommodations  for  34  members  of 

Committee  at  hotel  in  Peoria 196.04 

April  10,  1915 — Fee  to  hotel  employes  at  Peoria 10.00 

April  10  &  11 — Transportation  of  34  members  of  Commit- 
tee from  Peoria  to  their  respective 
homes  .  .  205.40 


Total    $531.44 

Amount  received  .  .    500.00 


Balance  due  Michael  L..  Igoe $  31.44 

0.  K.,  Michael  L.  Igoe. 
0.  K.,  Thomas  Boyer. 
0.  K.,  D.  E.  S.  Speaker. 

42 


HEADS  I  WIN  AND  TAILS  YOU  LOSE. 

A  custom  has  existed  in  the  State  of  Illinois  which 
has  placed  a  premium  upon  the  contest  for  seats  in  the 
House  and  Senate.  The  custom  is  this : 

If  a  Senator  is  elected  by  the  official  returns,  he  takes 
his  seat  and  the  defeated  candidate  brings  a  contest.  At 
the  conclusion  of  the  contest,  both  parties,  the  man  who 
lost,  as  well  as  the  man  who  won,  present  their  bills  for 
expenses  as  well  as  attorney's  fees,  and  the  State  pays 
both  the  winner  and  the  loser. 

In  the  event  the  contest  is  decided  in  favor  of  the 
person  bringing  the  contest,  the  State  pays  the  salary, 
$2,000.00,  to  the  man  who  was  originally  seated,  and  then 
pays  the  entire  salary,  $2,000.00,  a  second  time,  to  the 
person  who  was  successful  in  the  contest.  Eegardless  of 
whichever  way  the  contest  turns  out,  the  State  pays  the 
expenses  of  both  sides,  including  the  lawyers,  and  also 
pays  a  double  salary  at  the  conclusion  of  a  successful  con- 
test. At  the  last  session  of  the  Legislature  there  were 
two  notable  contests :  Baldwin  v.  Byrnes  and  Austin  v. 
Strauss.  The  returns  of  the  election  showed  both  Bald- 
win and  Austin  to  have  been  elected,  but  the  canvassing 
board,  consisting  at  that  time  of  State  Treasurer  Kyan, 
Auditor  of  Public  Accounts  Brady  and  Attorney-General 
Lucey,  decided  that  Byrnes  and  Strauss  were  elected. 
Baldwin  and  Austin  brought  a  contest. 

Austin  v.  Strauss. 

I  will  take  up  the  case  of  Austin  v.  Strauss  first,  and 
deal  with  it  from  the  point  of  view  of  State  expenditures. 
Senator  Austin  is  a  banker,  residing  in  Oak  Park.  He  is 
a  man  of  means  and  employed,  before  the  session  began, 
Myer  J.  Stein  as  his  attorney  to  carry  through  the  litiga- 
tion. As  a  careful  business  man,  he  made  a  contract  with 
Mr.  Stein  to  pay  him  a  regular  monthly  salary  until  the 
completion  of  the  contest,  and  also  to  pay  his  expenses, 

43 


At  the  conclusion  of  the  contest  Mr.  Austin  paid  Mr. 
Stein  his  final  check,  marking  the  same  "Receipt  in  full," 
and  discharged  him  as  his  attorney.  The  total  amount 
which  he  paid  Mr.  Stein  was  somewhere  in  the  neighbor- 
hood of  $600.00  salary,  in  addition  to  his  expense  account. 

Senator  Austin  has  testified  in  court  that  he  pro 
sented  no  bill  against  the  State  for  either  his  personal 
expenses  in  the  contest  or  for  his  attorney's  fees,  and 
that  he  never  knew  of  any  money  being  awarded  in  con- 
nection with  the  contest.  It  seems,  however,  that  Myer  J. 
Stein  presented  his  bill  to  the  Senate  as  attorney  for  Mr. 
Austin  and  received  $1,000  from  the  State. 

As  a  digression  in  this  subject-matter,  it  is  worthy 
to  note  that  Myer  J.  Stein  was  on  the  Senate  pay-roll 
under  the  title  of  law  secretary  to  the  Senate.  In  that 
position  he  received  $10.00  a. day  (including  Sundays), 
and  his  regular  pay  was  for  175  days  and  twenty  extra 
days,  making  $1,950.00  for  the  entire  session.  Now,  as 
previously  stated,  the  total  number  of  days  from  January 
6,  1915,  to  June  30,  1915,  is  176  days.  The  contest  in 
which  Mr.  Austin  was  engaged  occupied  parts  of  the 
months  of  January,  February  and  March.  During  this 
time  Mr.  Stein  drew  three  salaries : 

One  as  the  legal  representative  of  the  Senate ; 

One  as  the  attorney  for  Mr.  Austin ; 

And  still  a  third  salary  of  $1,000.00  for  representing 
the  election  committee  in  Mr.  Austin's  contest. 

In  the  contest  of  Austin  v.  Strauss,  Strauss  was 
finally  defeated  and  he  put  in  a  bill  for  his  loss  of  time. 
In  the  bill  which  he  presented,  he  stated  that  in  carrying 
on  this  contest  he  had  suffered  severe  losses  in  his  busi- 
ness because  he  had  been  obliged  to  investigate  records, 
etc.  For  his  expenses  and  loss  of  business  the  Senate 
allowed  him  $500,  and  allowed  his  attorney,  Frank  Ayers, 
the  sum  of  $1,000.00. 

Baldwin  v.  Byrnes. 

In  the  contest  of  Baldwin  v.  Byrnes,  Senator  Baldwin 
was  successful  in  displacing  Thomas  Byrnes.  Mr.  Byrnes' 
expense  account  allowed  by  the  Senate  was  $819.20.  Sen- 

44 


ator  Baldwin's  expense  account  was  also  $819.20.  The 
Senate  allowed  Frank  T.  Stanton  and  Frank  J.  Corr  as 
legal  services  and  attorneys',  fees  for  Thomas  Byrnes, 
$2,000.00 ;  and  allowed  Charles  A.  Williams  and  Chav.ncey 
M.  Miller,  as  attorneys  representing  Senator  Baldwin,  the 
sum  of  $2,000.00. 

The  State  of  Illinois  was  further  penalized  in  these 
contests  by  the  expenses  of  the  elections  committee.  The 
chairman  of  this  committee  was  Senator  Kent  E.  Keller, 
and  protracted  hearings  were  had  in  the  City  of  Chicago. 
This  required  the  hiring  of  hotel  rooms  and  the  paying 
of  traveling  expenses  of  all  committees,  taking  of  testi- 
mony and  payment  of  stenographers'  fees.  To  carry  on 
thrs  committee  work,  Senator  Keller  secured  from  the 
Treasurer,  or  rather,  as  is  claimed,  from  Andrew  Russell 
individually,  the  sum  of  $8,500.00.  This  the  Senator  pro- 
ceeded to  deposit  in  the  State  Bank  of  Chicago,  and  upon 
this  account  he  drew  his  checks  in  favor  of  the  various 
members  of  the  committee  for  their  personal  expenses,  as 
well  as  for  the  rooms,  etc.  The  total  expenditures  of  these 
two  contests,  so  far  as  the  committee  is  concerned,  is  as 
follows : 

SENATE  ELECTIONS  COMMITTEE. 

Twenty-third  District. 
Henry  Austin  vs.  Joseph  Strauss. 

Disbursements  for  employes  and  general  expense   $2,071.13 

Kent  E.  Keller,  member  of  sub-committee 588.37 

John  T.  Denvir,  chairman  of  sub-committee  -317.20 

C.  Haase,  member  of  sub-committee 461.40 

W.  A.  Compton,  member  of  election  committee 455.45 

Martin  B.  Bailey,  member  of  election  committee 408.00 

E.  S.  Smith,  member  of  sub-committee 501.35 

John  A.  Swanson,  member  of  sub-committee   317.20 

Wm.  E.  Corris,  stenographer 1,017.85 


$6,137.95 

ELEVENTH  DISTEICT 

Percival  G.  Baldwin  vs.  Thos.  F.  Byrnes. 

M.  H.  Cleary,  chairman  of  sub-committee $  586.80 

Adam  C.  Cliffe,  chairman  of  sub-committee 450.00 

Peter  E.  Coleman,  chairman  of  sub-committee 516.15 

Fred  B.  Roos,  chairman  of  sub-committee 350.00 

45 


Dan  Herlihy,  chairman  of  sub-committee 350.05 

Disbursements  for  employees  and  other  expenses 3,132.76 

Roberts  and  Devlin,  stenographers 2,016.00 

N".  Elmo  Franklin,  member  election  committee 77.65 

Raymond  D.  Meeker,  member  election  committee 77.00 


Total   $7,556.41 

It  thus  appears  that  the  cost  to  the  state  of  Illinois  of  the  two 
senate  contests  amounted  to  $21,832.76. 

It  has  been  generally  understood  that  if  the  House 
and  Senate  would  agree  not  to  pay  any  expenses  of  any 
contest,  there  would  be  fewer  contests  in  the  State  of  Illi- 
nois. At  the  most,  the  expenses  of  the  loser  should  not 
be  paid. 

An  illustration  of  how  ridiculous  it  is  to  pay  the 
expenses  of  both  sides  is  typified  in  the  House.  The  con- 
ditions are  much  different  there  than  in  the  Senate,  for 
the  reason  that  at  each  election  three  men  are  elected 
from  a  district.  Now,  it  is  claimed  the  law  requires  that 
any  contest  shall  include  as  defendants  all  those  who  were 
in  the  election.  Thus  the  House,  if  four  men  were  run- 
ning in  the  election  and  three  were  elected  and  the  loser 
decided  to  contest,  he  would  not  bring  his  suit  against 
the  highest  or  lowest  man,  but  would  include  all  the 
men  who  were  elected.  This  rule  would  apply  even 
in  a  case  where  one  man  received,  we  will  say,  20,000 
votes;  another  man,  8,000,  and  another  man  4,500. 
We  will  assume  the  contestant  claimed  he  received  4,600 
votes  and  was  therefore  entitled  to  displace  the  last  man. 
Now  the  contest  would  nominally  be  against  all  three.  In 
the  House  each  of  the  men  who  are  thus  contested  would 
hire  a  separate  lawyer,  incur  separate  expenses  and  ask 
that  they  be  reimbursed,  although  the  two  high  men  could 
not  under  any  circumstances  be  displaced  from  their 
seats.  If  there  were  more  than  four  running,  then 
the  other  defeated  parties  would  likewise  be  made  parties 
defendant. 


46 


In  one  contest,  which  happened  in  1913,  the  official 
reports  show  the  following  result : 

Mitchell    18,277 

Grunau   15,499 

Harris 8,438 

Farrar 8,295 

Anderson   7,40iy2 

Guy   387y2 

A  contest  was  brought  by  Farrar  and  he  was  suc- 
cessful in  unseating  Harris.  When  the  hearing  was 
called,  the  sub-committee,  which  was  composed  of  Maurice 
J.  Clark,  John  Griffin  and  A.  N.  Abbott,  finding  that  Guy 
was  not  represented  by  an  attorney,  voluntarily  ap- 
pointed ex-Senator  Thomas  J.  Dawson  to  represent  Guy. 
Mr.  Dawson  then  proceeded  to  represent  Guy  in  the  hear- 
ing. At  the  conclusion  of  the  matter,  Dawson  presented 
a  bill  to  the  committee  of  $590.00.  "When  the  bills  were 
presented  to  the  entire  committee,  this  was  disallowed, 
but  the  following  bills  were  allowed  and  paid : 

Farrar,  successful  contestant $700 

Ball,  attorney  for  Farrar $500 

Mitchell  for  expense $350 

Poulton,  attorney  for  Mitchell $500 

Grunau,  sitting  member,  for  expense $350 

Longenecker,  attorney  for  Grunau $500 

Harris,    formerly    a    sitting    member,    ex- 
penses     $289 

Cunnea  &  Christiansen,  attorneys  for  Har- 
ris    $500 

The  allowance  of  these  expenses  and  fees  indicates 
clearly  the  custom.  Neither  Mitchell  nor  Grunau  were  in 
any  danger  of  being  unseated.  The  real  contest  was  be- 
tween Farrar  and  Harris. 

Grunau 's  attorney  was  obliged  to  meet  the  objection 
presented  by  the  supposed  defect  in  the  nominating  peti- 
tions of  the  Progressives. 

As  I  have  said,  all  this  grows  out  of  the  willingness 
on  the  part  of  the  State  to  indulge  these  various  parties 
and  brings  about  litigation. 

47 


TKAVELINO  EXPENSES 

The  49th  General  Assembly  will  be  noted  for  one 
thing:  the  desire  of  its  members  to  travel.  Committees 
and  sub-committees  found  it  necessary  to  make  investiga- 
tions throughout  the  State.  I  am  not  now  referring  to 
the  larger  committees,  like  the  committees  to  visit  the 
State  institutions  or  the  Deep  Waterway  Committee,  nor 
am  I  referring  to  those  special  committees  appointed  by 
special  resolutions ;  but  to  what  is  known  as  the  standing 
committees.  In  both  the  House  and  the  Senate  there 
were  regular  committees  whose  duties  last  throughout 
the  entire  session.  In  the  Senate  there  are  twenty-six  of 
these  committees. 

The  Appropriation  Committee  would  create  sub- 
committees, dealing  with  various  topics,  and  these 
sub-committees  would  incur  special  expenses.  Taking 
our  information  from  the  vouchers,  we  find  there  was  a 
sub-committee  of  the  Appropriation  Committee  in  the 
Senate,  which  visited  the  Home  for  the  Blind  in  Chicago. 
This  committee  was  composed  of  Senator  Swanson,  Sena- 
tor Broderick  and  Senator  Herlihy,  all  of  whom  reside  in 
Chicago.  The  bills  are  as  follows : 

72514.  Senator  John  A.  Swanson.  June  2.  Sub-committee 
appropriations  Com.  To  expense  for  visiting  the  Home 
for  the  Blind  in  Chicago : 

Kailroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return $11.40 

Hotel  bill,  meals,  etc 7.00 

Automobile  hire   5.00 

Incidentals  .  1.60 


Total $25.00 

0.  K.     John  A.  Swanson,  Barratt  O'Hara.     Payable  out  of  Com. 
Expense  Fund,  49th  Gen.  Assem. 

72515.     Daniel  Herlihy.     Sub-committee  Appropriations  Com.  to 
expense  for  visiting  Eye  and  Ear  Infirmary,  Chicago,  111. 

48 


June  2,  railroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return. . .  .$11.40 

Hotel,  meals,  etc 7.00 

Automobile  hire   5.00 

Incidentals  .  1.60 


$25.00 

Payable  from  fund  for  Com.  Exp.,  49th  G.  A. 
0.  K.  Curtis ;  Barratt  O'Hara. 

72518.     Senator  John  Broderick.     Sub-committee  of  Appropria- 
tions Commission.     To  expenses  for  visiting  Eye  and  Ear 
Infirmary  in  Chicago,  111. 
June  2,  railroad  fare,  Springfield,  Chicago  and  return. . .  .$11.40 

Hotel  bill,  meals,  etc 7.00 

Automobile  hire 5.00 

Incidentals  .  1.60 


$25.00 
0.  K.  O'Hara  and  Curtis. 

The  somewhat  remarkable  similarity  of  the  expense 
bills  of  each  of  the  Senators  leads  one  to  the  conclusion 
that  in  satisfying  their  natural  desires,  there  was  a  re- 
markable unanimity.  Under  the  head  of  hotel  bills,  meals, 
etc.,  each  Senator  spent  exactly  $7.00.  In  the  matter  of 
automobile  hire,  each  Senator  spent  $5.00,  and  in  the 
matter  of  incidentals,  each  spent  $1.60.  The  total  for 
each  bill  came  to  exactly  $25.00. 

To  the  man  who  pays  the  taxes  and  whose  money  is 
thus  expended,  the  $5.00  items  are  of  great  interest.  The 
Chicago  Home  for  the  Blind  is  located  at  1900  Marshall 
Boulevard.  It  would  seem  that  the  committee  could 
have  found  one  automobile  and  have  made  this  trip, 
thereby  probably  saving  the  State  some  money. 

On  June  3rd  or  4th,  it  seems  it  became  necessary  for 
the  same  sub-committee  to  visit  the  Eye  and  Ear  Infirm- 
ary in  Chicago,  and  the  following  expenses  were  incurred-: 

72513.  Senator  John  A.  Swanson.  June  3  and  4.  Sub-committee 
of  Appropriation  Commission.  To  expenses  for  visiting 
Eye  and  Ear  Infirm ar}'  in  Chicago,  111. 

Railroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return $11.40 

Hotel  bill,  meals,  etc 7.00 

Automobile  hire   . 5.00 

Incidentals  .  1.60 


Total $25.00 

49 


0.  K.    John  A.  Swanson,  Barratt  O'Hara.     Payable  out  of  Com- 
mittee Expense  Fund,  49th  General  Assem. 

72516.  Daniel  Herlihy.  Sub-committee  Appropriations  Commis- 
sion. To  expense  for  visiting  Home  for  the  Blind,  Chi- 
cago, 111. 

June  4,  railroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return. . .  .$11.40 

Hotel  bill,  meals,  etc 7.00 

Automobile  hire    5.00 

Incidentals  .  , . . . ,      1.60 


Total $25.00 

0.  K.    Curtis;  Barratt  O'Hara. 

72519.  Senator  John  Broderick.  Sub-committee  of  Appropria- 
tions Commission.  To  expenses  visiting  Home  for  the 
Blind,  Chicago,  111.  June  4. 

Eailroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return $11.40 

Hotel  bill,  meals,  etc 7.00 

Automobile  hire   5.00 

Incidentals 1.60 


Total $25.00 

The  Eye  and  Ear  Infirmary  is  located  at  904  West 
Adams  Street,  which  is  five  blocks  from  the  Chicago 
&  Alton  depot.  There  is  a  street  car  on  Adams  Street 
which  operates  regularly  east  and  west,  passing  the  door 
of  the  Infirmary. 

The  foregoing  observations  apply  only  to  the  matter 
of  expense  account.  There  is  still  another  question  which 
these  vouchers  raise : 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  date  of  the  visits  to  the 
Home  for  the  Blind  was  June  2nd.  By  a  reference  to 
the  Senate  Journal  of  June  2nd,  it  appears  that  the  Sen- 
ate convened  at  ten  o'clock  A.  M.,  and  that  shortly  there- 
after Swanson  offered  an  amendment  to  a  bill  introduced 
by  Senator  Cliffe;  that  in  the  afternoon  session,  which 
convened  at  two  o'clock,  Senators  Swanson  and  Broder- 
ick vote  upon  the  first  bill  presented;  that  another  bill 
is  presented  on  which  Senators  Swanson,  Broderick  and 
Herlihy  are  recorded  as  voting;  that  there  were  seven 
other  roll  calls,  in  all  of  which  the  three  Senators  partici- 
pated, and  the  Senate  session  adjourned  at  6:30. 

50 


By  reference  to  the  Debates,  it  appears  Senator  Swan- 
son  carried  on  quite  a  long  debate  on  one  of  the  matters 
in  question.  It  is  found  on  pages  825  and  826  of  the 
Debates.  Again,  Senator  Swanson  is  in  the  Debates  on 
pages  834,  835,  836  and  837.  On  page  851,  Mr.  Swanson 
again  is  shown  to  have  offered  an  amendment. 

The  Senate  convened  at  ten  o'clock  on  June  3rd. 
Shortly  after  its  convening,  Mr.  Swanson  called  up  for 
second  reading  House  Bill  No.  392.  (Senate  Journal, 
page  1145.)  Upon  the  first  vote  taken,  Senators  Swan- 
son  and  Herlihy  appear  to  be  voting  in  the  affirmative. 
(Senate  Journal,  page  1152.)  This  vote  was  followed 
shortly  by  another  on  the  same  page,  in  which  Senator 
Swanson  and  Senator.  Herlihy  also  take  part.  There 
are  four  roll  calls  following,  in  which  both  Senators  Swan- 
son  and  Herlihy  take  part,  and  then  comes  a  roll  call 
(Senate  Journal,  page  1160),  in  which  Senator  Broder- 
ick  is  recorded  as  voting.  These  are  all  the  roll  calls  on 
June  3rd.  On  June  4th,  the  Journal  shows  a  perfunctory 
session,  with  an  adjournment  until  the  following  Tuesday. 

From  the  vouchers,  it  appears  that  another  sub-com- 
mittee, composed  of  Senators  Grorman,  Swanson  and 
Broderick,  visited  the  penitentiary  at  Joliet.  The  vouch- 
ers are  as  follows : 

72551.  Senator  Gorman,  Sub-committee  of  Senate  on  Appropria- 
tions, May  26  to  27.  To  expenses  visiting  the  Peniten- 
tiary at  Joliet,  two  trips : 

Railroad  fare,  etc.,  Springfield  to  Joliet  and  return $15.00 

Automobile  hire   6.00 

Incidentals  .  4.00 


$25.00 

0.  K.     Curtis;  Barratt  O'Hara.     Sub-committee,  Swanson,  Brod- 
erick, Gorman. 

72552.  John  A.  Swanson,  Sub-Committee  of  Senate  on  Appro- 
priations, May  26  to  27.  To  expenses  visiting  the  Peni- 
tentiary' at  Joliet,  two  trips : 

Railroad  fare,  etc.,  Springfield  to  Joliet  and  return $15.00 

Automobile  hire   6.00 

Incidentals   .  4.00 


$25.00 

0.  K.     Curtis;  Barratt  O'Hara.     Sub-committee,  Swanson,  Brod- 
erick, Gorman. 

51 


72553.  John  Frederick  Broderick,  Sub-committee  of  Senate  on 
Appropriations,  May  26  to  27.  To  expenses  visiting  the 
Penitentiary  at  Joliet,  two  trips: 

Eailroad  fare,  etc.,  Springfield  to  Joliet  and  return $15.00 

Automobile  hire G.OO 

Incidentals   .  4.00 


$25.00 

0.  K.     Curtis;  Barratt  O'Hara.     Sub-committee,  Swanson,  Brod- 
erick, Gorman. 

By  reference  to  the  Senate  Journals,  pages  1013- 
1072,  it  appears  that  the  Senate  was  called  tc  order  at 
ten  o'clock  on  Wednesday,  May  26th,  and  shortly  there- 
after Mr.  Curtis  called  up  Senate  Bill  364,  and  Messrs. 
Swanson  and  Gorman  appear  to  be  voting  in  the  affirma- 
tive. Immediately  thereafter,  Senator  Curtis  called  up 
three  other  bills,  and  in  each  case  Senators  Swanson  and 
Gorman  appear  to  be  voting  in  the  affirmative.  There 
were  twenty-three  other  roll  calls  on  May  26th  in  which 
Senators  Gorman,  Swanson  and  Broderick  participated. 
Toward  the  close  of  the  session  Senator  Swanson  made  a 
motion  to  suspend  the  rules.  The  session  adjourned  at 
six  o  'clock  P.  M.  On  the  next  day,  May  27th,  the  Senate 
convened  at  ten  A.  M.,  and  thereafter  a  roll  call  was  had 
upon  the  Waterway  Bill. 

Messrs.  Gorman,  Swanson  and  Broderick  all  ap- 
peared to  be  voting  in  the  affirmative.  Mr.  Swanson  was 
chairman  of  the  Waterway  Committee  in  the  Senate. 

Thereafter  there  appears  three  roll  calls,  in  which 
each  of  the  Senators  participated,  and  the  Senate  ad- 
journed at  2:25  P.  M.  to  reconvene  on  Saturday,  May 
29th. 

Additional  Vouchers. 

It  appears  that  there  were  many  other  committees 
in  both  the  House  and  Senate  that  visited  various  por- 
tions of  the  State.  The  vouchers  for  traveling  expenses 
varied  widely.  It  will  be  noted  that  some  members 
charged  the  State  only  for  their  actual  railroad  transpor- 
tation, while  others  found  occasion  to  use  many  taxicabs, 
and  deemed  it  necessary  to  spend  money  for  other  pur- 
poses. 

52 


In  the  "Committee  Expense  Bill"  it  is  contended 
that  any  member  of  the  Legislature  cannot  draw  from  the 
Treasury  more  than  $50,  as  provided  in  the  Constitution. 
The  vouchers  herewith: 

Voucher  No.  73160. 

.    To  expense  of  J.  R.  Moore,  Springfield  and  return $  56.30 

Voucher  No.  74064. 

Expense  account  of  William  L.  Corris.     Transcript  of 

proceedings,  House  Committee  on  Public  Utilities.  .   500.00 
Note :   The  0.  K.  on  this  is  as  follows : 
Awful  but  0.  K.     M.  McCormick. 
0.  K.     Thomas  A.  Boyer,  David  E.  Shanahan. 

.Voucher  No.  73159. 

P.  A.  Lande,  expenses  to  Cairo  and  return,  to  inspect 

levees,  May  13  to  May  17 31.60 

Voucher  No.  73158. 

Expenses,  Lande  and  Pervier 13.46 

Voucher  No.  73154. 

Expense  account,  John  Dailey,  railroad  fare,  Peoria  to 

Chicago  and  return $  6.00 

Taxicab  to  hotel  and  station 1.25 

Meals  en  route 3.00 

Parlor  car  two  ways 1.00 

Tips 1.00 

May  21,  1915. 

Railroad  fare  to  Chicago  and  return 6.00 

Taxicab  to  hotel  and  station 1.25 

Meals  en  route 3.00 

Parlor  car  two  ways .  1.00 

Tips    1.00 


Total $  24.50 

Voucher  No.  73153. 

State  of  Illinois  to  John  Dailey,  Dr. 

Railroad  fare  to  Chicago  and  return $  6.00 

Railroad  fare,  Chicago  to  Waukegan  and  return 1.40 

Taxi  from  hotel  to  station  and  return 1.25 

Meals  en  route 3.00 

Parlor  car,  two  ways 1-00 

Tips 1.00 

53 


May  1,  1915 

Kailroad  fare,  Chicago  to  Peoria,  one  day 3.00 

Railroad  fare,  Chicago  to  Waukegan  and  return 1.40 

Taxicab,  hotel  to  station  .  .  . '. 1.25 

Meals  en  route   •'. 2.00 

Parlor  car .50 

Tips 75 


Total $  22.55 

Approved :  Samuel  Ettelson ;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  73152. 

State  of  Illinois  to  John  A.  Swanson. 

Railroad  fares  for  members  of  Committee $  86.50 

Meals  for  members  of  committee   13.50 

Hotel  bills 20.50 

Incidentals  and  telegrams 4.35 


Total $124.35 

Approved,  John  A.  Swanson,  Barratt  O'Hara. 
Voucher  No.  73151. 

Cafe  Check,  Peoria.  Dated,  6-3-15. 
Senator  John  Dailey,  Waterway  Committee. 

Bill  rendered  Cafe $     4.00 

0.  K.   John  A.  Swanson ;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 
Voucher  No.  73150. 

F.  Jeff  Tossey.  Expenses  as  member  of  Fish  &  Game 
Committee. 

Railroad  fare $  14.80 

Sleeping-car  fare 3.50 

Hotel 5.50 

Meals 5.25 

Boats,  fares 2.50 

Incidental  .  1.50 


Total $  33.05 

Approved:    Bardill;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 
Note : — This  bill  does  not  give  any  date  nor  any  place  of 
destination. 

Voucher  No.  73149. 

Senator  Herlihy. 

Expenses,  trip  to  Elgin,  May  15,  1915 $  15.00 

Approved:   Roos;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 
Voucher  No.  73147. 

54 


Expenses  of  Roos. 

Trip  to  Elgin,  May  15,  1915 $  25.00 

0.  K.    Roos;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  73204. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Charles  E.  Franz.  For  expenses  in- 
curred as  member  of  Sub-Committee  on  Fish  and 
game  on  trip  to  Spring  Grove. 

Eailroad  fare,  Freeport  to  Chicago,  Chicago  to  Spring- 
field   $  10.96 

Berth 2.00 

Taxi  and  meals  .  2.25 


Total $  15.21 

0.  K.     Arthur  Roe,  Chairman. 

0.  K.     Thomas  A.  Boyer,  Chairman. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  Shanahan,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  73169— June  17,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Frank  J.  Leonard,  Doorkeeper. 

Springfield  to  Chicago $  5.95 

Incidental  and  expressing 6.00 

Chicago  to  Springfield 4.70 


Total $  16.65 

Approved:   Thomas  A.  Boyer. 
0.  K.    D.  E.  S.  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  73170. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Michael  Hennebry. 
Expense  as  member  of  Sub-Committee  on  Fish  and  Game 
visiting  fish  hatchery  at  Spring  Grove,  May  3. 

Railroad  fare,  Pullman,  etc.,  Chicago  and  return $  15.15 

0.  K.     Arthur  Roe,  Chairman. 
0.  K.     Thomas  Boyer. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S.  Speaker. 

Vouchor  No.  73205. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Frank  Dalton,  Dr. 
Expense  incurred  on  trip  to  Spring  Grove,  member  of 
Sub-committee,  May  3. 

Railroad  fare,  Chicago  and  return $  11.40 

Meals  en  route ,  3.50 


Total $  14.90 

0.  K.     Arthur  Roe,  Chairman. 
0.  K.     Thomas  Boyer. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S.  Speaker. 

55 


Voucher  No.  73398. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Donlan,  Dr. 

Expense  on  Sub-committee  on  trip  to  Pontiac,  April  3. 
Railroad  fare,  etc.,  Springfield  to  Pontiac,  and  return.  .$     6.64 
0.  K.     Boyer. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S.  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  73399. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Donlan,  Dr. 

Expense  incurred  as  member  of  Committee  on  Civil  Serv- 
ice on  trip  to  Chicago  for  hearing  on  Sanitary  Civil 
Service  bill. 

Railroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return,  Pull- 
man, etc $  11.40 

0.  K.     Thomas  Boyer. 

0.  K.     J.  J.  O'Rourke. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  S.  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  73691— June  18,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  P.  Maloney. 

For  Committee  expenses  occasioned  as  Member  of  40th 
General  Assembly. 

To  railroad  fare $     5.25 

Hotel  and  incidental  expenses   4.00 


Total $     9.25 

Approved.     Robert  Scholes,  Chairman,  Elec.  Com. 

0.  K.     Thomas  A.  Boyer,  Chairman,  Committee  on  Ex- 
penses. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  73757— June  17,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  John  D.  Turnbaugh. 

• 

For  Committee  expenses  occasioned  as  Member  of  49th 
General  Assembly. 

Four  days  hotel,  $7  per  day $  28.00 

Railroad  fare  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return 7.40 

Sleeper   2.00 


Total $  37.40 

0.  K.     Thomas  A.  Bover. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

56 


Voucher  No.  73521. 

State  of  Illinois  to  R.  J.  Barr,  Dr. 

Expenses  as  Member  of  Senate  Waterway  Committee  and 
of  Sub-committee  on  House  Bill,  as  H.  B.  914. 

To  railroad  fare  $  18.75 

Hotel,  meals,  etc 16.50 


Total $  35.25 

0.  K.     Swanson,  Chairman,  Waterway  Com. 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara. 

Note: — No  date  or  other  information  is  given  than  the 

above. 

Voucher  No.  77881. 

Senator  Charles  McNay 
Expenses,  railroad  fare,  meals,  hotel,  etc. 

Trip  of  Fish  &  Game  Sub-committee  to  Spring  Lake,  111..$  25.00 
Approved.     McNay. 
Approved.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77697. 

State  of  Illinois  to  T.  B.  Scouten. 

For  moneys  expended  in  behalf  of  Senate  Committee  in 
attendance  at  the  funeral  of  Mrs.  Odette  Allen,  wife 
of  Warden  Edmund  Allen  of  the  State  Penitentiary, 
June  22,  1915,  for  flowers,  railroad  fare,  hotel,  cabs 
and  incidentals $167.70 

Approved.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Payable  from  Contingent  Expense  Fund. 

Note: — Not  approved  by  Curtis. 

Voucher  No.  77262. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Edw.  J.  Smejkal,  Chairman, 
Committee  on  Appropriations. 

Transportation,  Chicago  to  Springfield  and  return $  7.40 

Pullman  fares 4.00 

Springfield  to  Joliet 2.96 

Pullman  fares 2.00 

Ottawa  to  Chicago  2.00 

Telephone  call,  Chicago  and  long  distance 15.00 

Telegraph ! 10.00 

Postage 5.00 

Bus,  taxi  and  car  fares  10.00 

Express 1.00 

Incidental  expenses 50.00 


Total $109.36 

Approved.    Edw.  J.  Smejkal,  Chairman. 
0.  K.    D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

57 


Voucher  No.  72697. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Michael  Igoe. 

To  expenses  incurred  while  serving  as  member  of  Sub- 
committee to  visit  Bartonville  State  Institution,  May 
10  and  11. 

Eailroad  fare,  hotel  expense  at  Bartonville  and  other  ex- 
penses   $  10.75 

0.  K.     Dudgeon. 

0.  K.     Smejkal. 

0.  K.     Thos.  Boyer. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72696. 

Sub-committee  to  visit  Milwaukee  to  hear  evidence  in  con- 
nection with  woman's  eight-hour  bill  in  favor  of 
C.  M.  Madsen. 

Eailroad  fare $  11.30 

Expenses 1.70 


Total $  13.00 

0.  K.     Turnbaugh. 

0.  K.     Boyer. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

State  of  Illinois  to  James  H.  Vickers. 

Expenses  as  Chairman  Sub-committee  on  licenses  in  con- 
nection with  boxing  bills.  La  Salle  Hotel,  April  16, 
1915. 

Voucher  No.  72691. 

Placek,  member  of  committee,  railroad  fare,  etc $  11.40 

Voucher  No.  72692. 

J.  J.  O'Eourke,  member  of  committee,  railroad  fare,  etc.     11.40 

Voucher  No.  72693. 

S.  B.  Turner,  member  of  committee,  railroad  fare,  etc. .     11.40 

Voucher  No.  72694. 

T.  P.  Devereux,  member  of  committee,  railroad  fare,  etc.     11.40 

Voucher  No.  72695. 

J.  H.  Vickers,  member  of  committee,  railroad  fare,  etc. .     22.50 


Total $  68.10 

0.  K.     Festerling. 

0.  K.     Boyer. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

58 


Voucher  No.  72690. 

Member  of  Sub-committee  to  visit  Cahokia  mounds  for  the 

purpose  of  purchasing  same  for  State  Park,  Dr.,  to 

Wm.  M.  Brown,  May  28  and  29. 

Eailroad  fare,  hotel  bill  and  cab  hire $  98.00 

0.  K.     William  M.  Brown,  Chairman. 
0.  K.     Smejkal. 
0.  K.     Boyer. 

Voucher  No.  72689— May  19,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Boyd. 
Expense  from  May  13  to  May  17  to  visit  Cairo,  Mound 

City  and  Shawneetown  to  inspect  levees $  31.60 

Approved.     Smejkal. 
Approved.     Boyer. 
Approved.     D.  E.  S. 

Voucher  No.   72687. 

Scholes,  Chairman. 
Expenses  of  Sub-Committee  to  Chicago. 

Eailroad  fare $     7.40 

Room,  three  days   7.50 

Other  expenses   3.70 


Total  . . . . '. $  18.00 

Approved.     Scholes. 

Approved.     Boyer. 

Approved.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72688. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Michael  Fahy. 
Expenses  as  member  of  Sub-committee  on  appropriations. 

Railroad  fare  to  Lincoln  and  return,  hotel,  etc $     7.75 

Henry  Schuberth,  fare  to  Lincoln  and  return,  hotel,  etc. .        8.50 


Total $  16.25 

Approved.     Smejkal. 

Approved.     Boyer. 

Approved.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72686. 

Expenses  of  Bippus;  Sub-committee  meeting  in  Chicago 

hearing,  House  Bill  194,  round  trip $     7.40 

Approved.     Festerling. 

Approved.     Boyer. 

Approved.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

59 


Voucher  No.  72685. 

Expense  Robert  Jackson,  re  Sub-committee  meeting  in 
Chicago,  hearing  on  House  Bill  194. 

Railroad  fare  to  Chicago  and  return  $     7.40 

0.  K.     Festerling. 
0.  K.     Boyer. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S. 

Voucher  No.  72684. 

Expense  J.  M.  Mason;  Sub-committee  meeting  in  Chi- 
cago, hearing  House  Bill  194. 

Round  trip  to  Chicago $     7.40 

Telegram    .44 


Total    $     7.84 

0.  K.     Festerling. 
0.  K.     Boyer. 
0.  K.     Shanahan. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Thomas  Curran  et  al. 

Voucher  No.  72674. 

Thos.  Curran,  expense  on  May  1  for  hearing  on  House 

Bill  406;  railroad  fare,  hotel,  meals $  23.40 

Voucher  No.  72675. 

T.   P.  Devereux,  Member  of   Committee;  railroad  fare 

Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return 11.40 

Dinner    2.00 

Voucher  No.  72676. 

Capt.  Farrell,  Member  of  Committee 13.40 

Voucher  No.  72677. 

C.  L.  Fieldstack,  Member  of  Committee 13.40 

Voucher  No.  72678. 

J.  J.  O'Rourke,  Member  of  Committee 13.40 

Voucher  No.  72679. 

J.  W.  Epstein,  Member  of  Committee 13.40 

Voucher  No.  72680. 

Joseph  Placek,  Member  of  Committee 13.40 

Voucher  No.  72681. 

Giblin,  Clerk  of  Committee  13.40 

Voucher  No.  72682. 

Leonard,  Sergeant-at-arms 13.40 

Voucher  No.  72683. 

J.  H.  Vickers,  Member  of  Committee 13.40 


Total  $146.00 

60 


State  of  Illinois  to  Joseph  Placek,  Chairman. 
Meeting  of  Sub-committee  on  Licenses  and  Miscellany  in 
Planters  Hotel,  Chicago,  2  to  5  p.  m.,  April  26,  1915, 
on  the  subject  of  House  Bill  No.  565. 

Voucher  No.  72668. 

Railroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return $  11.40 

Eent 8.00 

Incidentals  .  2.00 


Total    $  21.40 

Voucher  No.  72669. 

J.  J.  O'Rourke,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return,  and 

incidentals .' $  13.10 

Voucher  No.  72670. 

S.  B.  Turner,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return,  and  in- 
cidentals        13.40 

Voucher  No.  72671. 

J.  W.  Epstein,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return,  and 

incidentals   13.40 

Voucher  No.  72672. 

T.   A.   Boyer,  -  Springfield  to   Chicago   and  return,   and 

incidentals  13.40 

Voucher  No.  72673. 

T.  P.  Devereux,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return,  and 

incidentals   .  13.40 


Total $  88.40 

0.  K.     Festerling. 
0.  K.     Boyer. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S. 

State  of  Illinois  to  F.  A.  Garesche. 

Expenses  incurred  as  Chairman  of  Committee  on  Chari- 
ties at  a  hearing  in  Chicago,  April  19,  on  House  Bill 

924. 

Voucher  No.  72662. 

Fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return $  11.40 

Meals 4.00 

Room  for  hearing 10.00 


Total $  25.40 

61 


B.K.& 


Voucher  No.  72566. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Israel  Dudgeon. 

Expenses  Sub-committee  to  visit  Bartonville,  Mav  10  and 
11. 

Railroad  fare  and  incidentals $  10.75 

0.  K.     Dudgeon. 
0.  K.     Boyer. 
0.  K.     Smejkal. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S. 

Voucher  No.  72567. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Thos.  N.  Gorman. 
Expenses  as  member  of  Sub-committee  to  visit  Barton- 
ville, May  10  and  11. 

Car  fare,  hotel  expenses  and  incidentals $     5.00 

0.  K.     Dudgeon. 
0.  K.     Boyer. 
0.  K.     Smejkal. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S. 

Voucher  No.  72568. 

State  of  Illinois,  Dr.,  to  Charles  Curran. 
Expense  of  Sub-committee  of  appropriation  to  Elgin  Hos- 
pital, April  24. 

From  Springfield  to  Elgin  and  return $     9.68 

Miscellaneous  expense 12.18 


Total $  21.86 

0.  K.     Curran. 
0.  K.     Smejkal. 
0.  K.     Boyer. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S. 

Voucher  No.  72569. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  J.  O'Eourke. 
Expense  of  Sub-committee  to  visit  Elgin  Hospital. 

Springfield  to  Elgin  and  return $     9.68 

Miscellaneous  expense 2.50 


Total $  12.18 

0.  K.     Curran. 

0.  K.     Smejkal. 

0.  K.     Boyer. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

64 


Voucher  No.  72570. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Michael  Igoe. 

To    expenses    as    member    of    Waterway    Committee,    as 
follows : 

Apr.  17,  1915,  Chicago  to  Ottawa  and  return $  3.40 

Apr.  17,  1915,  Pullman r  . . .  1.00 

Apr.  17,  1915,  Expense  at  Ottawa 2,00 

Apr.  25,  1915,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return 7.40 

Apr.  25,  1915,  Pullman    4.00 

Apr.  25,  1915,  Expenses  in  Chicago   4.00 

May     1,  1915,  Chicago  to  Ottawa  and  return 3.40 

May     1.  1915,  Pullman    1.00 

May      1,  1915,  Expenses  at  Ottawa 2.00 


Total $  28.20 

0.  K.     Bover. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72571. 

State  of  Illinois  to  S.  E.  Tompkins. 
Expenses,  Sub-committee  on  Waterway,  April  21. 

Railroad  fare $  7.46 

Expenses 2.75 

Railroad  fare,  Chicago  and  return 2.00 

Hotel '. 3.00 

Return  railroad  fare 3.66 

Hotel  1.00 


Total $  19.87 

0.  K.     Igoe. 
Approved.     Boyer. 
Approved.     D.  E.  S. 

Voucher  No.  72572. 

State  of  Illinois  to  S.  F.  Tompkins. 
Expense  Waterway  Sub-committee,  May  1  and  2. 

To  Ottawa  and  return '. :.', $  10.43 

Hotel  3.00 


Total    $  13.43 

0.  K.     Igoe. 

0.  K.     Boyer. 

0.  K,     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 


65 


Voucher  No.  72575. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Israel  Dudgeon,  Dr. 
Apr.  18,  expenses  incurred  as  member  of  Sub-committee 
on  waterways.     Railroad  fare,  hotel  and  other  ex- 
penses at  Ottawa $     5.00 

Apr.  25,  1915,round  trip,  Springfield  to  Chicago 7.40 

Apr.  25,  1915,  parlor  car  1.50 

Apr.  25,  1915,  hotel  expenses 5.00 

Total    .$  18.90 

May  1,  railroad  fare,  hotel  and  other  expenses  at  Ottawa. .        5.00 

Total .$  23.90 

0.  K.     Igoe. 
0.  K.     Boyer. 
0.  K.     D/E.  S. 

Voucher  No.  72576. 

Statement  of  the  mone^y  expended  on  account  of  expenses 
of  the  Waterway  Committee  on  April  8  to  11,  1915, 
inclusive,  while  engaged  in  tour  of  inspection  of  the 
proposed  waterway  from  Joliet  to  Peoria,  as  follows : 
April  8,  1915,  fee  to  Pullman  porter  for  handling  bag- 
gage, etc.,  Springfield  to  Joliet. $  10.00 

April  8,  1915,  fee  to  waiters  for  serving  meal  during  trip 

from  Springfield  to  Joliet   10.00 

April  8,  1915,  caring  for  baggage  at  Joliet 10.00 

April  9,  1915,  fee  to  waiters  for  breakfast  at  Joliet 10.00 

April  9,  1915,  fee  to  waiters  for  serving  dinner  at  Ottawa  10.00 
April  10,  1915,  fee  to  waiters  for  serving  breakfast  at 

Ottawa   10.00 

April  10,  1915,  caring  for  baggage  at  Ottawa  and  La  Salle  8.00 
April  10, 1915,  railroad  fare,  16  members  of  Committee, 

Peoria  to  La  Salle  32.00 

April  10, 1915,  lunch  for  members  of  Committee  at  Peoria  10.00 
April  10,  1915,  fee  to  employes  on  boat,  La  Salle  to  Peoria  10.00 
April  10  and  11,  hotel  accommodations  for  34  members 

of  Committee  at  hotel  in  Peoria   196.04 

April  10,  fee  to  hotel  employes  at  Peoria 10.00 

April  10  and  11,  transportation  of  34  members  of  Com- 
mittee from  Peoria  to  their  respective  homes 205.40 

Total $531.44 

Amount  received  .  .    500.00 


Balance  due  Michael  L.  Igoe $  31.44 

0.  K.     Michael  L.  Igoe. 
0.  K.     Thomas  Boyer. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

66 


Voucher  No.  72578. 

State  of  Illinois  to  John  Griffin. 
Expenses  incurred  on  Sub-committee  of  Appropriations 

Committee  on  trip  to  Pontiac  Reformatory. 
Bailroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Pontiac  and  Chicago  and 

return $     9.40 

Meals   etc.  3.65 


Total $  13.05 

0.  K.     Arthur  Eoe. 

0.  K.     Boyer. 

0.  K.     Smejkal. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 


Voucher  No.  72579. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Otto  C.  Sonnemann. 
Expenses  incurred,  trip  to  Joliet,  visiting  Illinois  North- 
ern Penitentiary,  as  member  of   Sub-committee  on 
Appropriations,  March  6-17. 

Eailroad  fare $  11.52 

Hotel,  meals,  incidentals 6.00 


Total  $  17.52 

Approved.     Smejkal. 

0.  K.     Boyer. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72580. 

State  of  Illinois  to  S.  F.  Tompkins. 
Expenses  of  Sub-committee  of  Appropriations  to  Joliet 
Prison,  April  21,  1915. 

From  Springfield  to  Joliet  and  return $     9.32 

Hotel  bills,  two  days 6.00 


Total $  15.32 

Approved.     Smejkal. 

0.  K.     Bover. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72581. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  J.  O'Eourke. 

Expenses  of  Sub-committee  of  appropriations  to  Joliet 
Prison.    April  22,  1915. 

67 


April  22,  1915,  from  Springfield  to  Joliet  and  return.  .$     9.32 
Hotel  bills,  2  days  and  extras 6.00 

Total .$  15.32 

0.  K.     Smejkal. 

0.  K.     Boyer. 

0.  K.     D/E.  S.  ^ 

Note: — The  foregoing  vouchers  appear  on  the  letterhead 

of  Thos.  E.   Graham.     Apparently  Sub-committees 

visited  Joliet  Prison  on  different  dates. 

72543. 

Sub-committee  on  Labor  to  John  A.  Swanson. 
To  expenses,  attendance,  etc.,  Chicago  and  Peoria,  etc.,  on 
Senate  bills. 

Eailroad  fare,  etc $  20.00 

0.  K.     Baldwin. 

0.  K.     Harris. 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara. 

72544.  Mr.  Harris. 

Bill  of  Hotel  Jefferson,  dated  May  25 $     5.05 

0.  K.     Baldwin. 

0.  K.     Harris. 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara. 

72545.  E.  I).  Meeker,  expense. 

Kailroad  fare $  3.42 

Sleeper i 2,00 

Railroad  fare 3.70 

Sleeper 2.00 

Three  meals  .  , 4.00 


Total $  14.12 

0.  K.     Harris,  Chairman,  Labor  Com. ;  Barratt  O'Hara. 
72546.  W.  A.  Compton. 

Eailroad  fare  to  Chicago $  3.70 

Pullman 2.00 

Eailroad  fare  from  Chicago 3.70 

Pullman  car .75 

Hotel  and  meals 6.50 

Taxi   .  .50 


Total $  17.15 

0.  K.     Harris,  Chairman  Labor  Com.;  Barratt  O'Hara. 
72547.  George  W.  Harris. 

Sub-labor  Committee  Expense  in  Chicago. 

April  26,  meals $     3.00 

0.  K.     Harris,  Chairman  Labor  Com. ;  Barratt  O'Hara. 

68 


72548. 

Senate  Committee  on  Labor.    Geo.  W.  Harris  to  Hotel  La 
Salle. 

April  26,  rental  of  college  room   $  10.00 

O.K.     Harris ;  Barratt  O'Hara. 

72539. 

George  W.  Harris;  on  account  Sub-committee  on  Labor 
Committee  to  Peoria. 

May  21,  fare  to  Peoria $  3.00 

Parlor  car  , .50 

Porter 25 

Dinner   1.50 

Fare  to  Chicago 3.00 

Parlor  car  .50 

Porter   25 

Meal   .  1.50 


Total   $  10.50 

0.  K.     Baldwin,  Barratt  O'Hara. 

72540. 

Sub-committee  eight-hour  law,  La  Salle  Hotel,  May  17. 
P.  G.  Baldwin. 

Fare  to  Chicago $  3.70 

Sleeper 2.00 

Porter   50 

Dinner   • 1.50 

Fare  to  Springfield 3.70 

•  Sleeper  2.00 

Porter  .  .50 


Total    $  13.90 

0.  K.     Baldwin;  Harris,  Chairman;  Barratt  O'Hara. 

72541. 

Sub-committee,   eight-hour   law,    Peoria,   111.,   May   24. 
P.  G.  Baldwin. 

Fare  to  Peoria $  3.00 

Parlor  car  ; .50 

Porter    25 

Dinner  on  train 1.50 

Dinner  in  Peoria 1.00 

Fare  to  Chicago 3.00 

Parlor  car  .  .75 


Total  $  10.00 

0.  K.     Baldwin,  Harris,  Barratt  O'Hara. 


72542. 

Sub-committee  on  Labor,  etc.  Albert  J.  Olsen,  to  ex- 
penses necessarily  incurred  on  Senate  bills. 

Kailroad  fare,  hotels,  etc $25.00 

0.  K.     Baldwin,  Harris,  Barratt  O'Hara. 

72535.  William  L.  Corris.    May  4,  1915. 

To  transcript  of  proceedings  for  the  Sub-committee  of 
the  Senate  Committee  on  Labor,  Mines  and  Mining, 
held  at  La  Salle  Hotel,  Chicago,  April  26,  1915;  1 

day's  attendance   $  10.00 

Transcript  83  pages— 10  copies  $1 83.00 

Expenses,  railroad  fare  and  sleeper,  Springfield  to  Chi- 
cago   > 11.40 

Total   $104.40 

0.  K.     Chairman  on  Labor,  Lieut.  Governor. 

72536.  William.  L.  Corris. 

To  transcript  of  hearings  before  Senate  Committee  on 
Labor,  Mines  and  Mining,  in  regard  to  proposed 
legislation  in  re,  Woman's  Eight-hour  Bill  and  Mini- 
mum Wage  Bill;  hearings  held  at  La  Salle  Hotel, 
Chicago,  and  Jefferson  Hotel  at  Peoria,  111.,  234 

pages,  10  copies  $1 $234.00 

Expenses  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return.. 11.40 

Springfield  to  Peoria  and  return 6.30 


Total $251.70 

0.  K.     Harris,  Chairman;  Barratt  O'Hara. 

72537.  Arthur  A.  Allen. 

Stenographer  attendance   at   Sub-committee  hearings   4 

days,  Chicago  to  Peoria $  40.00 

Transcript  for  members,  10  at  lOc  each 100.00 

Eailroad  fare,  meals  and  Pullman 13.75 


Total $153.75 

0.  K.     Harris,  Chairman  ;  Barratt  O'Hara. 

• 

72538.  Patrick  J.  Carroll. 

For  expenses  on  Sub-committee    of    Senate    on    Labor, 

Mines  and  Mining,  as  follows: 

May  17,  Hotel  La  Salle,  Chicago $     8.00 

Automobile    3.50 

May  16  to  May  18,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return.  .       7.40 

Sleeper,  two  each  way 4.00 

May  24  to  May  28,  Springfield  to  Chicago  to  Peoria  and 

return    8.60 

70 


Sleeper    4.00 

Auto   in   Peoria 1.50 

Auto  in  Chicago 1.00 

Telegrams    1.75 


Total    $  40.75 

0.  K.     Baldwin,  Harris,  Barratt  0'IIara. 

72531. 

Expenses  of  Sam  W.  Abt,  Account  of   Sub-Committee 

visiting  Monks  Mounds,  Madison  County   $3.40 

0.  K.     Abt,  Curtis  and  Barratt  O'Hara. 

72532. 

J.  G.  Bardill ;  same  expenses  as  above $3.10 

0.  K.     Abt,  Curtis  and  Barratt  O'Hara. 

72533. 

Expenses  account  incurred  by  J.  G.  Bardill   (for  two), 

account  Fish  and  Game  Committee  trip  to  Spring 

Grove  Hatchery,  May  3. 

Railroad  fare  Highlands  to  Chicago $  17.00 

Pullman  4.00 

Chicago  to   Springfield 7.40 

Pullman    1.50 

Meals    .  2.00 


Total   $  31.90 

0.  K.  Bardill,  Chairman,  Fish  and  Game;  Curtis;  Bar- 
ratt O'Hara. 

72534. 

Clayton  C.  Pervier.  Expense  incurred  as  member  of 
Sub-committee  of  the  Appropriations ,  Committee, 
visiting  Cahokia  Mounds,  near  East  St.  Louis,  May 
29,  as  follows : 

Eailroad  fare,   Springfield  to   St.  Louis $  2.10 

One  meal    .50 

Railroad  fare,  East  St.  Louis  to  Galesburg 4.10 

Sleeper    2.00 

Railroad  fare,  Galesburg  to  Buda .92 

Breakfast 30 

Livery,  Buda  to  Sheffield,  5  miles 1.00 


Total $  10.92 

Approved:    Abt,  Curtis,  Barratt  O'Hara. 

71 


72520-1-2. 

To  expenses  Sub-committee  of  the  Appropriations  Com- 
mittee, to  visit  Chicago  State  Hospital,  to  wit:  May 
28  and  29. 

72520     E.   J.   Hughes,   for  railroad   transportation,   Pull- 
man, meals,  hotel  and  incidentals $  20.00 

72521.  John  Broderick,  same  as  above 20.00 

72522.  Frederick  Roos,  same  as  above 20.00 


Total   $  60.00 

Approved :     O'Hara  and  Curtis. 

72523-26.     Sub-committee   of   Committees   on   Appropria- 
tions, to  visit  State  Colony  for  Epileptics  at  Dixon. 

72523.  G.  W.  Harris,  railroad  fare,  hotels,  meals $  15.00 

72524.  F.  B.  Eoos,  same  as  above 15.00 

72525.  F.  J.  Tossey,  same  as  above 15.00 

72526.  A.  C.  Cliffe",  same  as  above •    15.00 


Total   $  60.00 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Curtis. 

72527.  May  20,  1915.     Appropriations  Sub-committee  to 
f                      Eastern  Illinois  Normal  at  Charleston.     Senator  W. 

S.  Jewell  two  days  and  expenses  May  16  and  17.. $23. 76 
W.  S.  Jewell. 
0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  President  of  Senate. 

72528.  Appropriations  Sub-committee  to  Eastern  Illinois 
Normal  at  Charleston. 

John  R.  Hamilton,  1  day's  expenses,  May  17 $12.60 

John  R.  Hamilton. 

0.  K.     President  of  the  Senate. 

72512. 

Statement  of  expenses  of  Sub-committee  of  the  Appro- 
priation Committee  visiting  Alton  Hospital  for  the 
Insane. 
T.  J.  Sullivan,  railroad  fare,  Alton  and  return,  and 

parlor  car    $     3.60 

Hotel  bill,  meals  and  incidentals    6.40 

Edw.  J.  Hughes,  railroad  fare,  same  as  above 10.00 

Peter  E.  Coleman,  railroad  fare;  same  as  above 10.00 


Total   $  30.00 

0.  K.     Curtis,  President  of  Senate;  Coleman,  Hughes. 

72 


72517.     F.  Jeff  Tossey.     Sub-committee  of  Appropriations 
Committee. 

Eailroad  fare,  Dixon  to  Chicago,  Springfield $  9.42 

Sleeper 3.40 

Meals    4.50 

Taxi .' .  . .  .  1.75 

Incidentals    .  1-50 


Total   $  20.67 

Approved:     E.  C.. Curtis,  Barratt  O'Hara. 

72505.     Senator  Curtis  and  Committee  on  Appropriations. 
Expense  account  of  D.  T.  Woodward  with  Committee  to 
inspect  levees  at  Cairo. 

Railroad  fare    -.  .  .$     8.32 

Berth 1.50 

Telephone,  etc .25 

Meals    .  2.50 


Total   $  12.57 

E.  C.  Curtis,  Senate  Contingent  Appropriation. 
0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara. 

72509.  May  20,  1915.     Sub-committee  work  on  Primary 
Elections  in  Chicago. 

Senator  S.  D.   Canady,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  one 

day's  expenses $20.40 

S.  D.  Canady. 

0.  K.     President  of  the  Senate;  Hamilton,  Chairman. 

72510.  May  20,  1915.     Sub-committee  work  on  Primary 
Elections  in  Chicago. 

Senator  G.  W.  Harris,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  one 

day's  expense $18.90 

0.  K.  Hamilton,  Chairman;  G.  W.  Harris,  President  of 
Senate. 

72511.  Sub-committee  on  Primary  Elections  in  Chicago. 
J.  R.  Hamilton,  Chairman. 

April  23,  mileage  and  expenses,  Springfield  to  Chicago.  .$  17.40 
April  25,  mileage  and  expenses,  Mattoon  to  Chicago. ...  16.96 
May  1,  mileage  and  expenses,  Mattoon  to  Chicago....  16.96 
May  8,  mileage  and  expenses,  Mattoon  to  Chicago 16.96 


Total    $  68.28 

0.  K.     Hamilton;  President  of  Senate. 

73 


72502.  May  9,  1915.     Sullivan  to  Chicago. 

Eailroad  fare   . ." '..'.. $  3.42 

Sleeper    2.00 

May  10,  meals   2.75 

Incidentals 4.00 

Chicago — Springfield    3.70 

Sleeper  2.00 


Total   $  17.97 

May    16,    1915.      Sullivan    to    Peoria. 

Eailroad  fare   $  2.10 

Meals 1.25 

Hotel    2.50 

May  17,  1915. 

Meals    " 2.85 

Incidentals    2.25 

Peoria — Springfield    1.30 


Total  $  12.25 

Grand  Total    $  30.22 

A.  E.  Eden,  Secretary,  Senate. 

0.  K.     G.  W.  Harris. 

Committee  Expense  Fund,  49th  General  Assembly,  Bar- 
ratt  O'Hara. 

Voucher  No.  72642. 

State  of  Illinois  to  H.  S.  Hicks. 
Expenses  Sub-committee  Industrial  Affairs,  Chicago. 

April  8-10-12,  railroad  expenses $  11.55 

April  8-10-12,  hotel  expenses 13.45 

Incidentals    .  1.95 


Total   $  26.95 

0.  K.     Turnbaugh;  Boyer;  D.  E.   S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72643. 

State  of  Illinois  to  PI.  0.  Murphy. 
Expenses    incurred    as    Chairman    of    Sub-committee    to 

visit  Normal  University  at  Carbondale. 
May  13,  Springfield  to  St.  Louis  and  return,  3  fares.  .$  12.80 

May  13,  Supper  en  route 5.30 

May  13-14,  Hotel  and  breakfast 15.00 

May  14,  St.  Louis  to  Carbondale  and  return,  3  fares.  . .      12.54 

May  14,  Hotel,  Carbondale    15.00 

May  15,  Hotel,  St.  Louis   9.00 

May  15,  Meals,  St.  Louis 10.60 


Total   $  80.24 

0.  K.     Smejkal;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

74 


Voucher  No.  72644. 

State  of  Illinois  to  William  M.  Brown. 

Expenses  of  trip  to  McComb  Normal  School  and  return. 

Transportation,  hotel  and  meals $20.40 

0.  K.     Smejkal;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Note — No  date  is  given  concerning  this  trip. 
Voucher  No.  72645. 

State  of  Illinois  to  H.  C.  Kessinger. 

Trip  to  McComb  Normal  School. 

Railroad  fare,  round  trip $  10.40 

Hotel,  etc 10.00 


Total   $  20.40 

Approved :     Smejkal. 
0.  K.     Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 
Voucher  No.  72635. 

State  of  Illinois  to  H.  F.  Schubert. 

Expense  as  Member  of  Sub-committee;  same  as  above.  .$15.40 
Voucher  No.  72636. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Frank  Ilyan. 

Expense  as  Member  of  Sub-committee;  same  as  above.  . .  .$15.40 
Voucher  No.  72637. 

State  of  Illinois  to  John  Jacobson. 

Expense  as  Member  of  Sub-committee;  same  as  above.  .  ..$15.40 
Voucher  No.  72638. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Frank  Seif. 

Expense  as  Member  of  Sub-committee;  same  as  above.  ..$15.40 
Voucher  No.  72639. 

State  of  Illinois  to  W.  M.  Brinkman, 
Industrial  Sub-committee. 

April  8,  railroad  fare    $     3.70 

Parlor  car   1.00 

Meals,  etc 14.50 

April  13,  railroad  fare  to  Springfield  and  berth 5.95 

April  19,  car  fare,  Milwaukee  and  return  from  Springfield     14.80 
Meals,  Milwaukee  trip 2.25 


Total   .' $  42.20 

0.  K.     Boyer;  Turnbaugh;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 
Voucher  No.  72640. 

State  of  Illinois  to  C.  M.  Madsen. 
Hearing  on  House  Bill  207  in  Chicago. 

Eailroad  fare $     7.40 

Street-car  fare    .  .40 


Total   , $       7.80 

0.  K.     Turnbaugh;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S,  Speaker. 

75 


Voucher  No.  72641. 

State  of  Illinois  to  H.  S.  Hicks. 

Expense  H.  S.  Hicks,  Milwaukee,  "Wis.,  Sub-committee 
on  -Industrial  Affairs. 

Eailroad  and  sleeping  car $  19.35 

Hotel    12.90 

Incidentals    1.95 

Total    $  34.20 

0.  K.     Turnbaugh ;  Boyer ;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72G30. 

State  of  Illinois  to  E.  E.  Meents. 
Expense  of  trip  to   Alton  Insane   Hospital,  Alton,   111. 

Transportation,  hotel,  etc.,  April  15 $35.20 

Approved :     Smejkal,  Boyer.     0.  K.  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72G31. 

State  of  Illinois  to  II.  C.  Kessinger. 
Expense  to   Alton   State   Hospital,   Aurora  and   return. 

Transportation,  hotel,  etc $35.20 

0.  K.     Smejkal;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72632. 

Expense  of  John  Eichardson,  visiting  Soldiers'  and  Sail- 
ors' Orphans'  Home,  April  9,  1915. 

Eailroad  fare   $       3.85 

Hotel  expense   3.00 


Total    $       6.85 

0.  K.     Smejkal;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72633. 

State  of  Illinois  to  John  S.  Burns. 

For  expenses  incurred  as  Chairman  of  Committee  on 
Military  Affairs.  Attending  hearing  at  Chicago, 
May  21,  in  connection  with  House  Bill  925. 

Eooms  201-202,  parlor  for  hearing $  20.00 

Eailroad  fare  to  Chicago  and  return,  sleeper 11.40 

Meals    6.80 

M.  S.  Giblin,  Clerk,  railroad  fare,  etc 11.40 


Total   $  49.60 

0.  K.     Burns;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Note — Attached  is  a  bill  from  Planters  Hotel,  May  31, 

Eooms  201-202,  $20.00. 

Voucher  No.  72634. 

State  of  Illinois  to  C.  A.  Young. 

Expense  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on  Military  Af- 
fairs; investigating  Armory  property  at  Chicago, 
April  26. 

76 


Railroad  fare,  Chicago  and  return $  11.40 

Meals    .  4.00 


Total   $  15.40 

Voucher  No.  72627. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Frank  Dalton. 

For  expenses  incurred  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on 
Utilities;  attending  hearing  at  Chicago  April  9. 

Eailroad  fare,  Pullman,  etc $  11.40 

Hotel  and  meals 5.00 

0.  K.     McConnick,  Thos.  A.  Boyer. 

Voucher  No.  72628. 

State  of  Illinois  to  C.  A.  Gregory,  Dr. 
Attending  Public  Utility  Committee  meeting,  Hotel  La 
Salle,  four  days  and  three  nights,  outcome  two  days 
and  two  nights  with  meals  to  Utility  Committee.  .  .$  20.00 

Eound-trip  railroad  fare 8.00 

Taxicab  1.00 

Livery  hire,  Sullivan  to  Lovington 2.00 

Eailroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Sullivan 1.25 


Total   $  32.25 

0.  K.     Boyer,  McC.,  D.  E.  S. 

Voucher  No.  72623. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  C.  McGloon,  Dr. 
For  expenses  incurred  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on 
Public  Utilities.     Hearing  evidence  on  bill  for  home 
Eule,  La  Salle  Hotel,  May  3. 

Eailroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return $  11.40 

Hotel  and  meals 2.00 


Total   $  13.40 

0.  K.     McGloon;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucner  No.  72624. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  C.  McGloon,  Da. 
For  expenses  incurred  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on 
Public  Utilities.     Hearing  evidence  on  home  rule  at 
La  Salle  Hotel,  Friday,  April  9. 

Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return $  11.40 

Hotel  and  meals 2.10 


Total    $  13.50 

0.  K.     Boyer;  McCormick;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

77 


Voucher  No.  72625. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  H.  Vickers,  Dr. 
Expenses  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on  Charities,  at 
hearing  in  Chicago,  April  9. 

Kailroad  fare,  Chicago  and  return $  11.10 

Hotel,  Chicago   5.50 


Total   $  16.90 

0.  K.     McCormick;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72626. 

Hotel  La  Salle  to  Medill  McCormick,  Dr. 

April    9,  room  complimentary;  phone   $  2.50 

April  10,  room  1031,  one  day;  phone  lOc 3.10 

May  1,  room  1008,  complimentary;  phone 1.50 

May  2,  phone  3.08 


Total $  10.18 

0.  K.     McC.;  Boyer;  D.  E.  Shanahan,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72617. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Thomas  Curran,  Dr. 
For  expenses  incurred  as  Member  of  Committee;  rail- 
road fare,  Pullman,  etc $11.40 

Voucher  No.  72618. 

State  of  Illinois  to  John  Gardner,  Dr. 

For  expenses  as  Member  of  Committee,  etc $11.40 

Voucher  No.  72619. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  T.  Prendergast,  Dr. 
For  expenses  incurred  as  Member  of  Committee,  etc $11.40 

Voucher  No.  72620. 

State  of  Illinois  to  S.  B.  Turner,  Dr. 

For  expenses  incurred  as  Member  of  Committee,  etc.  ...$11.40 
0.  K.     O'Rourke,  Chairman;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72621. 

State  of  Illinois  to  John  S.  Burns,  Dr. 
Expenses  incurred  on  trip  to  Chicago  as  Member  of  Sub- 
committee on  Public  Utilities,  April  24,  as  follows: 

Eailroad  fare $  11.40 

Hotel  and  meals  .  2.20 


Total $  13.60 

0.  K.     Boyer;  McCormick;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 
Voucher  No.  72622. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Harry  F.  Hamlin,  Dr. 
For  services   as   Member   of    Sub-committee   on   Public 
Utilities    in    connection    with    hearing    at    Chicago, 
April  9. 

78 


Eailroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return $  11.40 

Meals  and  incidentals 2.50 

For  services  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on  Public  Utili- 
ties in  connection  with  hearing  at  Chicago,  May  1, 
relative  to  House  Bill  266. 

Eailroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return $  11.40 

Meals  and  incidentals..  2.50 


Total   $  27.80 

0.  K.     McCormick;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 
Voucher  No.  72611. 

State  of  Illinois  to  McGloon,  Dr. 

Expenses  incurred  on  trip  to  Chicago  as  Member  of  Sub- 
committee on  Civil  Service. 

April  24,  1915,  railroad  fare,  Chicago  and  return $11.40 

0.  K.     O'Rourke,  Chairman;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 
Voucher  No.  72612. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  J.  O'Rourke,  Dr. 
Expenses  incurred  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on  Civil 
Service  at  hearing  held  in  Chicago  April  9. 

Railroad  fare,  meals,  etc $14.50 

Voucher  No.  72613. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  J.  Gardner,  Dr. 

Expenses,  etc.,  same  as  above $11.40 

Voucher  No.  72614. 

State  of  Illinois  to  W.  E.  Rinehart,  Dr. 

Expenses,  etc.,  same  as  above $16.40 

Voucher  No.  72615. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  T.  Prendergast,  Dr. 

Expenses,  etc.,  same  as  above $11.40 

0.  K.     Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 
Voucher  No.  72616. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  J.  O'Rourke,  Dr. 
For  expenses  incurred  as  Chairman  of  Sub-committee  of 
Civil   Service  at  hearing  in  Chicago  on  Municipal 
Court  Civil  Service  Bill. 

April  16,  railroad  fare,  Pullman,  etc $  11.40 

Dinner 1.75 


Total   $  13.15 

Voucher  No.  72602. 

State  of  Illinois  to  F.  J.  Seif,  Jr.,  Dr. 
To  expenses  incurred  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on 
Municipalities  on  trip  to  Chicago  in  connection  with 
Park  Consolidation  Bill. 
Railroad  fare,  Pullman,  etc.,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and 

return    $11.40 

0.  K.     Gorman;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

79 


Voucher  No.  72603. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  A.  G.  Trandel,  Dr. 
For  expenses  incurred  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on 
Municipalities  on  trip  to  Chicago  in  connection  with 
Park  Consolidation  Bill. 
Railroad  fare,  Pullman,  etc.,  Springfield  to  Chicago  and 

return $11.40 

0.  K.  Gardner,  Acting  Chairman  Sub-committee; 
Boyer;  Gorman;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72604. 

Expense  of  F.  J.  Bippus,  Sub-committee  meeting  in  Chi- 
cago hearing  House  Bill  259. 

Eound  trip  to  Chicago   $7.40 

0.  K.     Gorman;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Robert  E.  Wilson  et  al. 

For  services  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on  Municipali- 
ties in  connection  with  hearing  and  investigation  at 
South  Chicago  relative  to  House  Bill  No.  628,  the 
Calumet  Harbor  Bill. 

Voucher  No.  72605.     May  15,  1915,  R.  E.  Wilson,  Member 
of  Committee;  railroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Chicago 

and  return $  11.40 

Meals  and  incidentals 5.00 

Voucher  No.  72606.     May  15,  1915,  Ryan,  same  expense.     11.40 

Voucher  No.  72607.     May  15,  1915,  J.  H.   Helwig,  same 

expense    11.40 

Voucher  No.  72608.     May  15,  1915,  J.  W.  Epstein,  same 

expense    11.40 

Voucher  No.  72609.     May  15,  1915,  R.  J.  Mulcahy,  same 

expense    11.40 

Voucher  No.  72610.     May  15,  1915,  Giblin,    Clerk,    same 

expense 11.40 


Total $  93.40 

0.  K.     Gorman;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72599. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Michael  Igoe,  Dr. 
To  expenses  incurred  while  serving  as  Member  of  Sub- 
committee of  the  Appropriations  Committee  in  con- 

80 


nection    with    investigations    concerning    Foot    and 

Mouth  Disease. 

April  12,  round  trip,  Springfield  to  Chicago $  7.40 

Parlor  car 1.50 

Hotel  expenses    5.00 

April  19,  round  trip,  Springfield  to  Chicago.' 7.40 

Parlor  car   1.50 

Hotel  expenses   5.00 


Total   $  27.80 

0.  K.     Dudgeon;  Smejkal ;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72600. 

State  of  Illinois  to  John  F.  Lynch,  Dr. 
To  expenses  incurred  while  serving  as  Member  of  Sub- 
committee of  the  Appropriations  Committee  in  connec- 
tion with  investigations  concerning  Foot  and  Mouth 
Disease. 

April  12,  railroad  fare,  Chicago  and  return $     8.00 

Parlor  car  and  sleeper 3.50 

Hotel  expenses   5.50 

April  19,  railroad  fare,  Chicago  and  return 8.00 

Parlor  car  and  sleeper 3.50 

Hotel  expenses  in  Chicago 5.50 


Total    $  34.00 

0.  K.     Dudgeon;  Smejkal;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72601. 

State  of  Illinois  to  D.  B.  Ellis,  Dr. 
To  expenses  incurred  while  serving  as  Member  of  Sub- 
committee of  the  Appropriations  Committee  in  con- 
nection   with    investigations    concerning    Foot    and 
Mouth  Disease,  as  follows : 
January  23,  1915,  round  trip,  Springfield  to  Chicago.  .$     7.40 

Parlor  car   1.50 

Hotel  expense  in  Chicago 5.00 


Total   $  13.90 

0.  K.     Thos.  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72596. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Harold  C.  Kessinger,  Dr. 
To  expenses  incurred  while  serving  as  member  of  Sub- 
committee of  Appropriations  Committee  in  connec- 
tion with  investigations  concerning  Foot  and  Mouth 
Disease,  as  follows : 

April  12,  1915,  round  trip  Springfield  to  Chicago $     7.40 

Parlor  car ] 1.50 

81 


Hotel  expenses,  etc.,  in  Chicago 5.00 

April  19,  1915,  round  trip  Springfield  to  Chicago 7.40 

Parlor  car  1.50 

Hotel  expenses  in  Chicago 5.00 


Total $  27.80 

0.  K.     Dudgeon;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72597. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Arthur  Eoe,  Dr. 

To  expenses  incurred  while  serving  as  member  of  Sub- 
committee of  Appropriations  Committee  in  connec- 
tion with  investigations  concerning  Foot  and  Mouth 
Disease,  as  follows : 
April   12,   1915,   railroad  fare,   round  trip  Vandalia   to 

Chicago $  13.16 

Hotel  and  other  expenses  5.00 


Total $  18.16 

0.  K.     Dudgeon;  Boyer;  Smejkal;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  '72598 

State  of  Illinois  to  Israel  Dudgeon,  Dr. 
To  expenses  incurred  while  serving  as  member  of  Sub- 
committee of  Appropriations  Committee  in  connec- 
tion with  investigations  concerning  Foot  and  Mouth 
Disease. 

April  12,  round  trip  Springfield  to  Chicago $     7.40 

Parlor  car   1.50 

Hotel  expenses,  etc 5.00 

April  19,  round  trip  Springfield  to  Chicago 7.40 

Parlor  car   1.50 

Hotel  expenses   5.00 


To.tal $  27.80 

0.  K.     Dudgeon;  Smejkal;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

April  17,  1915,  Peoria  to  Chicago,  railroad  fare $  3.50 

April  19,  1915,  Chicago  to  St.  Louis 9.50 

Hotel 3.50 

Breakfast  1.25 

Lunch  2.50 

Supper  2,00 

Taxi 3.00 

Incidentals  .  2*50 


Total  $  24.35 


Grand  Total    $  75.45 

0.  K.     Turnbaugh;  Boyer;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 


Voucher  No.  72595. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  W.  Kentchler,  Dr. 
For  expenses  incurred  as  member  of  Sub-committee  on 

Industrial  Affairs  at  hearings  held  at  various  points 

regarding  the  Child  Labor  Bill. 

April  11,  railroad  fare,  Belleville  to  Chicago $  9.75 

Supper  in  St.  Louis 1.50 

April  12,  hotel,  Chicago   3.50 

Incidentals 1.00 

Railroad  fare  to  Springfield 5.70 

April  15,  railroad  fare,  Springfield  to  Decatur .75 

April  16,  hotel  and  meals 5.10 

Railroad  fare,  Decatur  to  Peoria 1.65 

April  17,  hotel  Peoria 6.50 

Railroad  fare,  Peoria  to  Belleville 6.50 

April  19,  car  fare  to  E.  St.  Louis .35 

Hotel    1.50 

April  20,  car  fare,  Belleville  to  E.  St.  Louis 35 

Hotel,  East  St.  Louis 4.50 

Telephone > .50 


Total $  49.15 

0.  K.     Turnbaugh;  Boyer;  D.  E.  Shanahan,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  72592. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  C.  McGloon,  Dr. 
Expenses  incurred  trip  to  Elizabethtown,  Sub-Committee 
on  Industrial  Relations,  May  23  and  24;  investigat- 
ing Spar  Mines  at  Fairview. 

Railroad  fare,  Chicago  to  Elizabethtown $  10.00 

Hotel 5.50 

Incidental  expenses 2.00 

Railroad  fare,  Elizabethtown  to  Springfield 6.96 

Hotel 5.00 

Incidental  .  1.50 


Total $  30.96 

0.  K.     Rentchler,  Turnbaugh,  Boyer,  D.  E.  S. 

Voucher  No.  72593. 

State  of  Illinois  to  0.  P.  Tuttle,  Dr. 
Expenses  incurred  as  in  foregoing,  railroad  fare  to  Eliza- 
bethtown and  return   $  14.72 

Boat    2.00 

Hotel  and  incidentals  .  9.50 


Total $  26.22 

0.  K.     Rentchler,  D.  E.  S.,  Turnbaugh,  Boyer. 

83 


Voucher  No.  72594. 

State  of  Illinois  to  A.  Rowstenkowski,  Dr. 
Five  days'  trip,  April  12,  11)15. 

Springfield  to  Chicago    $  5.70 

Hotel    3.00 

Breakfast   1.25 

Lunch  2.50 

Supper   2.00 

Incidentals  and  taxi  .  3.00 


Total $  17.45 

April  16,  1915,  Springfield  to  Decatur $  1.10 

Hotel 3.50 

Breakfast   1.35 

Lunch 2.60 

Supper   2.40 

Incidentals 3.00 

Total $  13.95 

April  17,  1915,  Decatur  to  Peoria $  2.15 

Hotel 5.00 

Breakfast   1.30 

Lunch 2.50 

Supper    1.25 

Incidentals  .  4.00 


Total  •$  16.20 

For  expenses  incurred  as  Member  of  Sub-committee  on 
Industrial  Relations  in  connection  with  hearings  at 
Chicago  on  ten-hour  bill  for  Drug  Clerks,  Monday, 
May  19,  1915,  as  follows: 
Voucher  No.  72585. 

J.  T.  Prendergast,  member  of  Committee;  railroad  fare, 

Springfield  to  Chicago  and  return $  11.40 

Voucher  No.  72586. 

S.  F.  Thompkins,  same  expense   11.40 

Voucher  No.  72587. 

J.  Placek,  same  expense 11.40 

Voucher  No.  72588. 

C.  L.  Fieldstack,  same  expense 11.40 

Voucher  No.  72589. 

0.  P.  Tuttle,  same  expense 11.40 

Voucher  No.  72590. 

Giblin,  Clerk 11.40 


Total    $  68.40 

0.  K.     Prendergast,   Chairman   Sub-Corn.;   Turnbaugh; 
D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

84 


Voucher  No.  72591. 

State  of  Illinois  to  J.  W.  Eentchler. 

Expense  incurred  as  member  of  Sub-committee  on  Indus- 
trial Affairs,  investigating  Spar  Mines  at  Fairview. 

Railroad  fare  to  Elizabethtown  and  return $  14.72 

Hotel  and  incidentals 9.50 

Total $  24.22 

0.  K.     Turnbaugh;  Bo}^er;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 
72555. 

Senator  John  Daley,  License  Committee  to  Hotel  La  Salle. 

April  24,  Room  1614,  1  day $     4.00 

Restaurant    4.70 

Telephone 05 

Total .$     8.75 

John  Daley,  Chairman  License  Com. 

Senate  Contingent  Expense  Appropriation. 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 
72558  to  72562. 

Sub-committee  of  Appropriations  Com.  appointed  to  in- 
vestigate claims  in  relation  to  Foot  and  Mouth 
disease. 

To  expenses  incurred  while  serving  as  members  of  the 
Sub-committee,  etc.     Four  trips  to  the  Stock  Yards 
Inn  at  Chicago;  traveling,  hotel  and  other  expenses: 
72558. 

Richard  J.  Barr $  55.60 

72559. 

Peter  E.  Coleman 55.60 

72560. 

Edw.  J.  Hughes 55.60 

72561. 

AT.  A.  Franklin 55.60 

72562. 

Al.  F.  Gorman 55.60 

0.  K.     R,  J.  Barr,  Chairman  Senate  Sub-Corn. 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara. 
72563  Senator  John  Daley  to  Hotel  La  Salle. 

Commission  on  Public  Utilities,  May  16,  room $     3.50 

Restaurant 3.55 

Telephone 10 

May  17,  restaurant  charges 1.65 

Total .$     8.80 

0.  K.     John  Daley,  Chairman  Pub.  Util. 

Senate  Contingent  Expense  appropriation. 
0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut,  Gov. 

85 


^3148.  P.  G.  Baldwin. 

Appropriation  Sub-committee  on  Institutions;  Jackson- 
ville Insane,  Deaf  and  Dumb  and  Blind. 
0.  K.     P.  G.  Baldwin. 

Eailroad  fare,  etc $     8.00 

Hotel  and  meals 10.00 

Incidentals  .  5.00 


Total -  .$  23.00 

Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

73158. 

To  Chairman  of  Appropriation  Committee  Expense,  re- 
port of  the  Sub-committee  for  visiting  Western  State 
Normal  School  at  Macomb.  (Lande  &  Pervier.) 

To  railroad  fare   $     9.86 

Hotel  bill  .  3.60 


Total $  13.46 

Signed.     F.  A.  Lande,  April  29,  1915. 
0.  K.     E.  C.  Curtis,  Barratt  O'Hara. 

73746.  Peter  E.  Coleman. 

Eailroad  fare,  hotel  bill,  incidentals,  member  of  Sub- 
committee on  appropriations,  for  trip  to  Alton.... $  10.00 

Approved.  Peter  E.  Coleman,  Chairman,  Sub-Corn.; 
President  of  the  Senate,  E.  C.  Curtis. 

73747.  Patrick  J.  Sullivan. 

Eailroad  fare,  etc.,  as  stated  above  $  10.00 

Approved.  Peter  E.  Coleman,  Chairman  Sub-Corn. ; 
President  of  the  Senate,  E.  C.  Curtis. 

73748.  E.  J.  Hughes. 

Eailroad  fare,  etc.,  as  stated  above $  10.00 

Approved.  Peter  E.  Coleman,  Chairman  Sub-Corn. ; 
President  of  the  Senate,  E.  C.  Curtis. 

73749.  F.  C.  Campbell. 

For* visits  to  State  Hospitals,  Anna  and  Lincoln,  Sub- 
committee of  Appropriations  Com.,  May  20  to  24, 
1915,  inclusive. 

Eailroad  fare  and  berth $106.39 

Hotel  and  meals 52.05 

Entertainments   34.46 

Taxicabs  .  5.00 


Total    $197.90 

0.  K.     E.  C.  Curtis,  Barratt  O'Hara. 

86 


73750. 

F.  C.  Campbell,  May  2  to  4,  1915,  inclusive. 
Trip  to  Spring  Grove,  111.,  of  Fish  and  Game  Com. 

Railroad  fare  and  berths $  41.61 

Hotel  and  meals  . . 32.00 


Total $73.64 

O.K.     Curtis ;  Barratt  O'Hara. 

73753.  To  A.  E.  Eden. 

For  lunches  and  taxicab  service  furnished  to  the  employes 
of  the  Secretary  of  the  Senate's  office.  These  items 
were  paid  when  the  stenographers  and  clerks  were 
compelled  to  work  after  meal  time  and  at  late  hours 
in  the  night $  75.00 

0.  K.     A.  E.  Eden,  Secy,  of  the  Senate. 

Payable  from  fund  for  committee  expenses,  49th  G.  A. 

Barratt  O'Hara. 

74225.  Fred'k  R.  D.  Young. 

Committee  expenses  occasioned  as  member  of  the  49th 

General  Assembly. 
Four  trips  to  Chicago  and  return  as  member  of  committee 

on  elections  and  public  utilities  and  transportation, 

railroad  fare,  etc $  44.40 

0.  K.     Robert  Scholes,  Chairman  Election  Com. ;  Thos. 

A.  Barr;  D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 
72549. 

Expense    of    Sub-committee    on    Appropriations    to    the 

Southern  Illinois  Prison  at  Chester]    "W.  A.  Compton, 

Chairman. 

Twenty-two  meals $  27.50 

Checking  twelve  grips 1.20 

Railroad   Fare    Committee,    Springfield   to   Menard    and 

return 67.68 

Services  for  Committee   21.00 

Parlor  car  for  Committee  and  services  on  same.  .  8.75 


Total $126.13 

0.  K.     Sam  W.  Latham,  Chairman;  Barratt  O'Hara. 
72551. 

Senator  Gorman,  Sub-committee  of  Senate  on  Appropria- 
tions, May  26  to  27. 

To  expenses  visiting  the  Penitentiary  at  Joliet,  two  trips : 
Railroad  fare,  etc.,  Springfield  to  Joliet  and  return.  . .  .$  15.00 

Automobile  hire    6.00 

Incidentals 4.00 

Total $  25.00 

87 


0.  K.     Curtis ;  Barratt  O'Hara. 
Sub-committee,  Swanson,  Frederick,  Gorman. 

72552.  John  A.  Swanson 

Same  expenses  as  stated  above $  25.00 

72553.  John   Frederick  Broderick. 

Same  expenses  stated  above 25.00 

72554. 

To  expenses  incurred  by  Sam  W.  Latham,  Member  of 
Sub-committee  of  Com.  of  Appropriations,  appointed 
to  visit  the  Southern  Insane  Asylum  at  Anna. 

Railroad  fare  for  three   ". $  19.67 

Pullman  tickets   6.00 

Meals-and  incidentals  .  13.65 


Total    $  39.32 

0.  K.     Curtis;  Barratt  O'Hara. 

Voucher  No.  73157. 

Expenses  of  stenographers  and  stenographic  work  for  com- 
mittee on  minimum  wage  and  eight-hour  law,  held 

at  various  points  in  the  State $134.00 

(Signed)    A.  E.  Eden. 
Approved:     A.  J.  Olson. 
Approved:     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  73156. 

Transcript  of  Committee  on  Education,  William  L.  Corris.$  57.60 

Voucher  No.   73155. 

To  William  L.  Corris,  transcript  proceedings  before  Sen- 
ate Committee  on  Labor $  94.00 

Voucher  No.  73762. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Hotel  La  Salle. 
For  services  in  connection  with  work  of  Senate  Com- 
mittees   $  103.65 

Approved:     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  74100. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Charles  F.  Trick. 
For  extra  clerical  services  and  overtime  on  budget  work 

in  connection  with  Appropriations  Committee.  . .  .$  200.00 
Approved:  E.  C.  Curtis,  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77882. 

Senator  Sam  Latham. 

Expenses   incurred   for   stenographic   work   by   Educa- 
tional Visitation  Committee  of  the  Senate $  110.00 

Approved:  Sam  Latham,  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 
Note — This  voucher  has  no  date. 


Voucher  No.  77883. 

Robert  R.  Clark. 

Extra  clerical  work  for  Senate  Educational  Commit- 
tee, overtime  and  expenses  incurred  $100.00 

Approved :  Sam  Latham,  Barratt  O'Hara. 
Note. — This  bears  no  date. 
Voucher  No.  77885. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Paul  G.  Burns. 
For  services  as  proofreader  on  house  journals  and  de- 
bates from  Jan.  6  to  June  30 $704.00 

0.  K.     Higgins,  Printer  Expert. 
0.  K.     B.  H.  McCann. 
0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 
(Pay  out  of  contingent  expense  fund.) 
Voucher  No.  77897.— Springfield,  June  30,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Byron  F.  Smith,  312  E. 

Washington  St.,  Springfield. 

Services  rendered  as  Lieutenant  Governor  and  members 
of  Senate,  Jan.  6  to  June  30,  as  per  attached 

statement $  90.00 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Payable  from  Committee  Expense  Fund,  49th  General 

Assembly. 

Attached  statement  is  a  bill  dated  July  1,  1915,  for  the 
following : 

June  30,  services  to  Senate $  90.00 

Voucher  No,   77898. 

Katherine  Devere. 

160  days,  $1  per  diem,  as  stenographer,  Senate  employe.  $166.00 
Note. — This  is  a  mere  slip  of  paper  written  in  lead  pen- 
cil and  not  approved  by  the  President  of  the  Sen- 
ate or  any  other  person. 
Voucher  No.  73143— June  15,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  W.  H.  Overhue,  Secretary  of 

Committee  on  Appropriations. 

For  special  and  extra  hours  as  stenographer  and  clerk 
of  Committee  on  Appropriations  and  Sub-Com- 
mittee thereto  the  sum  of $200.00 

0.  K.     E.  C.  Curtis. 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  73142— Springfield,  June  15,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Charles  A.  Schuppe,  Budget  Clerk. 

Compensation  for  special  and  extra  hours  as  clerk  of 

Committee  on  Appropriations  and  Sub-Committee 

thereto  the  sum  of $200.00 

0.  K.     E.  C.  Curtis. 
0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

89 


Vouchers  Nos.  73049  and  73050— Joliet,  July  8,  1913. 

State  of  Illinois  to  R.  J.  Barr,  Dr. 
To  expenditures  in  connection  with  work  of  Senate  Spe- 
cial Committee,  appointed  under  Senate  Resolution 
48  to  make  examination  of  walls  at  or  near  Joliet, 
as  per  vouchers  hereto  attached,  to-wit : 

To  News  Company,  copies  of  paper $     4.00 

To  Joliet  Printing  Company,  pamphlets 26.75 

Western  Union  Tel.  Co.,  telegrams 3.42 

C.  A.  Noble,  expenditures  and  services 179.02 


Total $213.19 

I  hereby  certify  that  the  above  claim  is  just,  true  and 
unpaid. 

R.  J.  Barr, 

Chairman  of  above-named  Committee. 

Approved :  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

For  services  rendered  for  enrolling  and  engrossing  Com- 
mittee of  the  Senate,  49th  General  Assembly,  as 
follows : 

Voucher  No.  73133— Walter  M.  Girney,  40  days,  May  5 

to  June  14 $160.00 

Voucher  No.  73134— Grace  E.  Birkett,  20  hours,  May  5 

to  June  14 .-. .        10.00 

Voucher  No.  73135 — M.  Kisselberg,  25  days,  May  11  to 

June  14 100.00 

Voucher  No.  73136 — Linnie  Vance,  10  days,  May  11  to 

June  14 40.00 

Voucher  No.  73137— W.  H.  Richards,  20  days,  May  5  to 

June   14    80.00 

Voucher  No.  73138— George  F.  Campbell,  40  days,  May 

5  to  June  14. . .- 160.00 

Voucher  No.  73139 — George  F.  Campbell,  41  days,  March 

26  to  May  5 164.00 

Voucher  No.  73140— W.  H.  Richards,  15  days,  April  1 

to  May  5   60.00 

Voucher  No.    73141 — Grace  Birkett,   30  hours,  April  1 

to  May  5 15.00 


Total $550.00 

Approved :  Franklin,  Chairman ;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut. 
Gov. 

90 


Voucher  No.  73412— Springfield,  June  18,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  I.  Shon,  Auto  Livery. 
For  auto  hire  for  President  of  Senate  and  Senators.  ...   $  16.00 
Approved :    Barratt  O'Hara. 

Vouchers  Nos.  73642  and  73643. 

Services  of  Charles  A.  Williams  and  Chauncey  M.  Mil- 
ler, attorneys  for  P.  H.  Baldwin  in  contest  of  Bald- 
win vs.  Byrne.  Allowed $2,000.00 

Charles  A.  Williams $1,000.00 

Chauncey  A.  Miller .   1,000.00 

0.  K.     Kent  E.  Keller,  Chairman  Election  Committee. 
0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara. 

Voucher  No.  73644. 

Expense  account  of  Percival  G.  Baldwin. 
Two  of  the  items  in  this  account  are  as  follows :     Ex- 
pense incurred  investigating  conditions  in  different 
precincts  and  consulting  judges  and  clerks  where 

charges  of  irregularities  were  made $100.00 

Expense  incurred  in  appearances  before  Senate  Sub- 
Committee  at  Election  Commissioner's  Office  at 
Chicago,  111.,  during  recount  125.00 


Total    $819.20 

Approved:  Kent  E.  Keller,  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  73689— Springfield,  June  18,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Eobert  Scholes. 
For  necessary  committee  expenses  as  member  of  the 

49th  General  Assembly  $  18.00 

Approved:  Scholes,  Chairman  Election  Com. 

0.  K.     Thos.  Boyer,  Chairman  Com.  on  Expenses. 

0.  K.     D.  E.  S.,  Speaker. 

Voucher  No.  73693— May  4,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois,  in  account  with  William  L.  Corris. 
Expenses  and  transcript  on  waterways  hearing  at  Chi- 
cago, April  24,  1915   $  66.00 

Voucher  No.  73694— May  4,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Wm.  L.  Corris. 
Transcript  of  proceedings  before  Joint  Committee  on 

Fish  and  Game    $  80.00 

Voucher  No.  73695— May  10,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Wm.  L.  Corris. 

To  reporting  hearings  before  the  House  Committee  on 
Insurance  in  re  proposed  insurance  legislation,  583 

pages $378.95 

Approved:     Wm.    Scanlon,   Thomas   Boyer,   David   E. 
Shanahan,  Speaker. 

91 


Voucher  No.   73522— Springfield,  June   15,   1915. 

State  of  Illinois,  Senate  Labor  Sub-Committee. 

To  Albert  J.  Olson,  Dr. 

Expenses  at  three  meetings  at  La  Salle  Hotel,  Chi- 
cago, 111 $  60.00 

Subject  before  the  Sub-Committee  was  the  investiga- 
tion of  minimum  wage. 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.   Gov. ;    A.    J.    Olson, 
Chairman. 

Voucher  No.  73523— Springfield,  June  15,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois,  Senate  Labor  Sub-Committee. 

To  Albert  J.   Olson,  Dr. 
Expenses   at   three   meetings   at   the   La    Salle   Hotel, 

Chicago,  111 $  50.00 

Subject  before  Sub-Committee,  as  above,  was  the  in- 
vestigation of  minimum  wage. 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.   Gov.;    A.    J.    Olson, 
Chairman. 

Voucher  No.  73524— Springfield,  June  15,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois,  Senate  Labor  Sub-Committee. 

To  John  Denvir,  Dr. 

Expenses  at  three  meetings  at  the  La  Salle  Hotel,  Chi- 
cago, 111 $  50.00 

Subject  before  the  Sub-Committee,  as  above,  was  the 

investigation  of  minimum  wage. 

0.  K.:     Barratt  0'  Hara,  Lieut.   Gov.;  A.  J.   Olson, 
Chairman. 

Voucher  No.  73525 — Springfield,  June  15,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois,  Senate  Agricultural  Sub-Committee, 

to  Patrick  J.  Carroll,  Dr. 
Expenses  at  two  meetings  at  La  Salle  Hotel,  Chicago, 

111 $  25.00 

Subject  before  the  Sub-Committee,  as  above,  was  the 

investigation  of  corn  flour,  its  usefulness,  etc. 
0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.   Gov.;    A.    J.    Olson, 

Chairman. 

Voucher  No.  73526 — Springfield,  June  15,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois,  Senate  Agricultural  Sub-Committee, 

to  John  Broderick,  Dr. 
Expenses  at  two  meetings  at  La  Salle  Hotel,  Chicago, 

111 $  25.00 

Subject  before  the  Sub-Committee,  as  above,  was  the 

investigation  of  corn  flour,  its  usefulness,  etc. 
0.   K.      Barratt   O'Hara,  Lieut.   Gov.;    A.   J.    Olson, 

Chairman. 

92 


Voucher  No.  73527— Springfield,  June  15,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois,  Senate  Agricultural  Sub-Commit- 
tee, to  Henry  Andrus,  Dr. 

Expenses  two  meetings  at  La  Salle  Hotel,  Chicago,  111..  .   $  25.00 

Subject  before  the  Senate  Sub-Committee,  as  above,  was 
the  investigation  of  corn  flour,  its  usefulness,  etc. 

0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  A.  J.  Olson. 

Voucher  No.  73528. 

State  of  Illinois,  Senate  Agricultural  Sub-Committee, 

to  F.  B.  Eoos,  Dr. 

Expenses  two  meetings  at  La  Salle  Hotel,  Chicago,  111. .  .   $  25.00 
Subject  before  the  Senate  Sub-Committee,  as  above,  was 

the  investigation  of  corn  flour,  its  usefulness,  etc. 
0.  K.     Barratt  O'Hara,  A.  J.  Olson. 

Voucher  No.  73529— June  15,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois,  Senate  Labor  Sub-Committee,  to  Al- 
bert J.  Olson,  Dr. 

Expenses  at  two  meetings,  La  Salle  Hotel,  Chicago,  111.  $  40.00 

Subject  before  the  Sub-Committee,  as  above,  was  the 
investigation  of  corn  flour,  its  usefulness,  etc. 

0.  K.  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov.;  A.  J.  Olson, 
Chairman. 

Voucher  No.  77896-^Tune  30,  1915. 

For    services   rendered    Senate    Committee   on    Public 

Utilities,  by  Mr.  F.  C.  Beene   $  50.00 

0.  K.     John  Dailey,  Chairman,  Pub.  Utilities  Com.; 

Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77895— June  29,  1915.. 

To  Merton  E.  Martin  for  extra  services  rendered  the 
Senate  Election  Committee  as  clerk  and  stenog- 
rapher v $  50.00 

0.  K.  Kent  E.  Keller,  Chairman;  Barratt  O'Hara, 
Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77899— June  30,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois,  to  E.  E.  Clark,  Secy,  to  Lieut.  Gov. 

Money  advanced  to  St.  Nicholas  Hotel  as  per  statement 
attached  for  committee  rooms  and  services  rendered 
President  and  members  of  the  Senate;  Jan.  6  ta 
June  30,  1915 .•';  $  74.34 

Approved :     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Note. — This  is  not  approved  by  E.  C.  Curtis,  and  the  bill 
attached  is  a  bill  of  the  St.  Nicholas  Hotel  to  the 
President  of  the  Senate. 

Hotel  bill $  74.38 

93 


Toucher  Xo.  77884— June  29,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Hayes  Garage. 

Auto  services  for  President  and  members  of  the  Senate. .  $  53.75 
Approved:     Barratt  O*Hara,  Lieut  Gov. 
Note. — This  was  not  approved  by  Curtis. 

Toucher  No.  74678. 

For  A.  F.  Frazier.  For  expenses  of  stenographer  and 
stenographic  work  for  the  Committee  of  Charitable 
Institute  durinsr  their  visit  to  the  different  institu- 
tions of  the  State. $160.00 

O.  K.    Abt.  Chairman;  Barratt  O^Hara. 

Voucher  No.  74677. 

T.  Burroughs,  for  clerical  work  for  Committee  on  Pri- 
mary Elections  Senate,  49th  General  Assembly. .  $115.00 
Expenses  and  overtime 25.00 


Total    $140.00 

O.  K.     John  Hamilton,  Chairman;  Barratt  OTIara, 
President  Senate. 

Toucher  Xo.  7 7369— Springfield,  June  18, 1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  B.  H.  McCann. 
For  services  rendered  previous  to  the  meeting  of  the 
49th  General  Assembly  in  preparing  blanks,  blank 
books  and  doing  other  necessary  work  to  be  per- 
formed before  the  meeting  of  the  General  Assembly, 

the  sum  of ". .  $300.00 

O.  K.    D.  E.  S^  Speaker. 

Toucher  No.  77829. 

Committee  on  Elections,  to  1L  S.  Giblin,  Dr. 
For  services  and  expenses  as  clerk  of  Sub-Committee, 
handling  election  contest  in  Third  Senatorial  Dis- 
trict   $  53.60 

O.  K.    Bobert  Scholes,  Chairman  Election  Committee. 

O.  K.    Boyer. 

0.  K.    D.  E.  S^  Speaker. 

Toucher  No.  77797 — Springfield,  June  30,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  B.  F.  Savage. 
For  night  service  rendered  various  Committees  of  the 

Senate,  49th  General  Assembly $  75.00 

O.  K.    Barratt  O'Hara. 

Xote. — Xot  approved  by  Curtis. 

M 


Voucher  No.  77713. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Claiborne  S.  Close. 
For  extra  clerical  work  and  overtime  and  expenses  for 
tour  of  Senate  Educational  Committee  of  the  49th 

General  Assembly $125.00 

Approved:  Latham,  Chairman  of  Educational  Com.; 
Barratt  O'Hara,  Chairman  of  Senate. 

Voucher  No.  77706— June  22,  1915. 

Senator  Dailey  to  Hotel  La  Salle. 
Account  rendered  for  room  for  meeting  of  Senate  Com- 
mittee on  Public  Utilities $  5.00 

0.  K.    John  Dailey,  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77704— No  Date. 

State  of  Illinois  to  W.  S.  Cropper. 
Services  rendered  President  of  Senate  and  members  of 

49th  General  Assembly $  14.00 

Voucher  No.  77703. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Charlotte  K.  Herlihy. 
For  overtime  and  services  as  special  stenographer  for 

Senate  Committees  of  the  49th  General  Assembly. .  $  75.00 
Approved:     Daniel  Herlihy,  Chairman   Sub-Corn,   on 
Appropriations;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77702. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Joseph  Gleason. 
For  overtime  and  services  as  special  stenographer  for 

Senate  Committees  of  the  49th  General  Assembly. .  $  76.00, 
Approved:     John  T.  Denvir,  Chairman    of    Elections 
Sub-Committee;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  75256. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Dowell  Parker. 

For  janitor  work  for  Election  Committee   $  50.00 

Approved:    Kent  E.  Keller,  Chairman  Election  Com- 
mittee ;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  75255. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Miller  Carson. 

For  janitor  work  for  Election  Committee $  50.00 

Approved:     Kent  E.  Keller,  Chairman  Election  Com- 
mittee; Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  75254. 

State  of  Illinois  to  T.  Sheridan. 

For  janitor  work  for  Judiciary  Committee $  25.00 

Approved:     E.   J.   Barr,   Chairman  Judiciary   Com.; 
Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut  Gov. 

95 


Voucher  No.   75253. 

State  of  Illinois  to  F.  C.  Beene. 

Special  services  rendered  State  Public  Utilities  Com- 
mission    $  30.00 

Approved :    Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. ;  John  Dailey, 

Chairman  Senate  Public  Util.  Com. 
Note. — No  date  is  given  to  this  bill. 

Voucher  No.  74853.— June  21,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Wm.  A.  Schwarze. 
For  services  rendered  to  the  Enrolling  and  Engrossing 

Clerk    $  25.00 

Approved:    Charles  W.  Baldwin,  David  E.  Shanahan. 
Note. — Not  approved  by  Committee  Chairman. 

Voucher  No.  74099— Springfield,  June  6,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  C.  Singleton. 

For  services  as  janitor  Senate  Committee  on  Appropri- 
ations     $  25.00 

0.  K.    E.  C.  Curtis,  Barratt  O'Hara. 

Voucher  No.  73770. 

State  of  Illinois  to  T.  B.  Scouten. 
For  money  spent  in  behalf  of  committee : 

Postage 22.87 

Telegrams   4.65 

Telephones  2.00 



$  29.52 

Approved:     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 
Note. — Not  approved  by  Curtis. 

Springfield,  June  18,  1915. 

Extra  service  rendered  Enrolling  and  Engrossing  Com- 
mittee : 

Voucher  No.  74102— Marie  Powell $100.00 

Voucher  No.  74103— Cecelia  Eedlich 100.00 

Voucher  No.  74104— J.  B.  McCreary 100.00 

Voucher  No.  74105— M.  Curtin 100.00 

Voucher  No.  74106— Effie  M.  Snider 100.00 

Voucher  No.  74107— Fred  W.  Rinck.  .  200.00 


Total >"-! $700.00 

0.  K.     Franklin,  Chairman  Enrolling  and  Engrossing 

Committee;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 
Extra  services  employes  House  of  Representatives: 
Voucher  No.  77864 — Helen  Troesch,  stenographer  to  the 
Speaker;  for  night  work  Speaker's  room  and  Ap- 
propriations Committee  room $  50.00 

96 


Voucher  No.  77865 — Ida  Eoland,  stenographer  Commit- 

mittee  on  Appropriations  for  night  work 50.00 

Voucher  No.  77866 — Lucy  Fountain,  stenographer  Com- 
mittee on  Roads  and  Bridges,  for  night  work....       30.00 

Voucher  No.  77867 — Verna  Raymond,  stenographer  Com- 
mittee on  Agriculture,  for  night  work 30.00 

Voucher  No.  77868— Charles  Slater,  policeman,  Feb.  17  to 

Feb.  27    36.00 

Voucher  — Charles  Slater,  clerk,  Committee  on 

Appropriations,  for  night  work 30.00 

All  the  foregoing  approved  by  Edw.  Smejkal ;  0.  K.,  D. 
E.  S. 

Note.— Voucher  Numbers  79290-91-92-93-94-95-96  are 
for  Young,  Curran,  Scholes,  Devereaux,  Merritt, 
Kilens  and  Smith  for  $50  each,  for  acting  as  a  com- 
mittee to  approve  the  last  day's  journal  after  the 
adjournment  of  the  House. 

Chicago  &  Alton  Railroad,  Traffic  Department. 
Merle  W.  Dancy,  April  21,  1915. 

Passenger  and  Ticket  Agt.,  Springfield. 

Legislative  Waterway  Committee, 

49th  General  Assembly. 
Gentlemen : 

I  give  you  below  statement  of  railroad  transportation,  Pullman 
transportation  and  dining-car  service  furnished  your  committee, 
Thursday,  April  8,  on  train  No.  4,  leaving  Springfield  at  3  :10 : 

83  tickets,  Springfield  to  Joliet,  at  $2.96 $245.68 

2  tickets,  Springfield  to  Chicago,  at  $3.70. . 7.40 

88  parlor  car  seats  to  Joliet,  at  70c 61.60 

86  meals  on  dining  car,  at  $1.00 86.00 

Total    $400.68 

I  would  be  pleased  to  have  voucher  for  the  above  in  my  favor 
at  your  early  convenience. 

Yours  truly, 

M.  W.   Dancy, 

Pass,  and  Ticket  Agent. 
Voucher  No.  72573. 

General  Assembly  to  Lester  Horan,  Ottawa. 

Transcript  of  meeting  of  citizens,  April  17 $  10.20 

0.  K.     Igoe,  Boyer,  D.  E.  S. 

Voucher  No.  72574. 

General  Assembly  to  Lester  Horan,  Ottawa. 

Transcript  of  citizens'  meeting,  May  1 $  31.55 

0.  K.    Igoe,  Boyer,  D.  E.  S. 

97 


Voucher  No.  72577. 

State  of  Illinois  to  John  T.  Coffey,  Jr. 
Extra  clerical  work,  stenographic  report  for  Commit- 

mittee  and  Sub-Committees  on  Agriculture $  75.00 

Expenses  with  Committees  out  of  Springfield 25.00 

Total    , $100.00 

0.  K.    Carroll,  Chairman;  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  72583. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Wm.  L.  Leech,  Chairman. 
Three-day  meeting  rooms,  April  9-10-12,  hearing  on 

eight-hour  bill  at  Morrison  Hotel $  30.00 

0.  K.    Turnbaugh,  Chairman;  Boyer,  D.  E.  S. 

Voucher  No.  72584. 

State  of  Illinois  to  Laura  O'Brien. 
Stenographic  report  on  hearing  eight-hour  bill  before 

Committee,  March  24,  1915  $  25.00 

0.  K.  Turnbaugh,  Boyer,  D.  E.  S. 

72500  T.  B.   Scouten. 

For  moneys  expended  in  behalf  of  the  Committees  of 
the  Illinois  Senate  of  the  Forty-ninth  General  As- 
sembly to  postage,  telegrams,  telephones  and  in- 
cidentals : 

Postage $441.76 

Telegrams    62.59 

Telephones  76.45 

Incidentals  .  24.75 


Up  to  and  including  June  8 $605.55 

Approved:     Lieut.  Gov. 

Payable  out  of  funds  for  the  Committee  Expense,  49th 
Gen.  Assembly. 

72501  T.  B.  Scouten. 

For  moneys  expended  same  as  above: 

Postage $109.61 

Telegrams    14.37 

Telephones   7.90 

Incidentals    ,  12.00 


Up  to  and  including  Feb.  8 $143 .i 

Approved:     Lieut.  Gov. 

Payable  out  of  funds  for  Committee  Expenses,  49th 
General  Assembly. 

98 


72504  Robert  E.  Clark. 

For  clerical  and  committee  work  in  connection  with 
contingent  expenses  for  Senate,  49th  General  As- 
sembly   $300.00 

Approved:  Lieut.  Gov. ;  0.  K.,  E.  C.  Curtis. 

Payable  from  Committee  Expense  Fund,  49th  Gen. 
Assembly. 

72506  John  Kelly. 

For  mopey  advanced  for  clerical  and  stenographic  work 

for  Sub-Committees  of  the  Senate   $141.50 

For  expenses  for  Committees  58.50 


Total    ;. . .   $200.00 

E.  C.  Curtis. 

Approved :    Barratt  O'Hara,  President  of  Senate. 

Payable  from  Committee  Expense,  49th  Gen.  Assembly. 

72507  June  10,  1915. 

Burrelles  Press  Clipping  Bureau,  New  York  City. 

Services  furnished  Hon.  Edmund  Beall,  member  of 
Senate,  48th  General  Assembly,  in  connection  with 
Committee  work $171.25 

Approved:    Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Payable  from  fund  for  expenses  of  Committees  of  the 
49th  General  Assembly. 

Attached  to  voucher  is  a  statement  from  BurrelPs  Press 
Clipping  Bureau,  45  Lafayette  St.,  New  York, 
against  tbe  Hon.  Edmund  Beall,  Alton,  111.,  for 
$171.25,  dated  August  1,  1913. 

72529  Macomb,  111.,  May  10,  1915. 

Legislative  Educational  Visiting  Committee,  to  Hotel 

Pace,  Dr. 

To  52  meals , $  26.00 

0.  K.    Barratt  O'Hara,  Pres.  of  the  Senate. 

0.  K.    Sam.  W.  Latham,  Chairman  Educational  Com. 

Voucher  to  Senator  Latham  payable  from   Committee 

Expense  Fund,  49th  Gen.  Assembly. 

72556  General  Assembly,  Senate. 

To  Lester  J.  Horan,  Dr.,  Ottawa,  111.,  for  one-half  of  the 
following  bill :  To  transcript  of  meeting  of  citizens 
and  Sub-Committee,  held  at  Clifton  Hotel,  Ottawa, 
April  17,  1914: 

34  sheets  of  original  at  45c;  34  sheets  of  duplicate  at 

15c;   total,  $20.40.      One-half $  10.20' 

Approved:  Chairman  of  Waterway  Committee;  Presi- 
dent of  the  Senate. 

39 


72557  To  Lester  J.  Horan,  Dr. 

To   transcript   of  citizens   and    Sub-Committee   meeting, 

held  at  the  Clifton  Hotel,  Ottawa,  May  1: 
45  sheets  original  at  45c;  45  sheets  duplicate  at  15c; 

722  sheets  copy  at  5c;  total  $63.10.     One-half $  31.55 

Approved:  Chairman  of  Waterway  Committee;  Presi- 
dent of  the  Senate. 

73751  Secretary  of  the  Senate  to  Geo.  E.  Purcell,  Dr. 
For  compiling  two  copies  of  the  Notary  Public  of  the 

State  of  Illinois  for  the  Governor's  message $100.00 

Payable  from  Fund  for  Committee  Expense,  49th  G.  A. 
0.  K.     Eden,  Barratt  O'Hara. 

73752  To  A.  E.  Eden. 

For  furnishing  stamps  for  Standing  and  Sub-Commit- 
tees for  the  49th  Gen.  Assembly $100.00 

0.  K.  A.  E.  Eden,  Secretary  of  the  Senate;  Barratt 
O'Hara. 

Payable  from  Fund  for  Committee  Expenses,  49th  G.  A. 

77876-77879  Springfield,  III,  June  30,  1915. 

Enrolling  and  engrossing  Committee  of  the  Senate,  49th 
General  Assembly,  State  of  Illinois,  as  follows: 

77876— W.  H.  Kichards,  5  days,  from  June  14  to  19 $  20.00 

77877 — M.  S.  Kesselberg,  5  days,  as  above 20.00 

77878 — Walter  McGivney,  5  days,  as  above 20.00 

77879— Geo.  F.  Campbell,  16  days,  June  14  to  June  30. .  64.00 


$124.00 
0.  K.    Chairman  E.  and  E.  Committee ;  Barratt  O'Hara. 


100 


BOVING-  COMMITTEES. 

For  a  number  of  years  past  each  General  Assembly 
lias  sent  forth  on  the  date  of  its  adjournment  a  number 
of  special  committees.  The  last  Legislature  exceeded  all 
bounds  in  this  respect  and  authorized  fourteen  commit- 
tees. The  Lieutenant-Governor  was  able  to  secure  the 
rehabilitation  of  the  so-called  White  Slave  Committee. 
Thomas  Curran  was  appointed  chairman  of  a  new  Home- 
Finding  Committee,  while  numerous  other  committees 
were  created  to  investigate  insurance,  the  physiological 
effect  of  corn  flour  on  the  human  system,  public  utilities, 
etc.  All  told,  as  will  appear  by  the  list  appended,  provi- 
sion was  made  for  114  members  to  serve  on  these  various 
committees  during  the  year  and  a  half  following  the  ad- 
journment. In  most  instances,  money  was  appropriated 
for  the  expenses  of  these  committees  and  the  Auditor 
authorized  to  pay  their  expenses  upon  vouchers  approved 
by  the  chairman  of  the  committee.  The  first  White  Slave 
Committee  had  traveled  extensively  over  the  State  of 
Illinois,  and  having  covered  the  State  thoroughly,  took  a 
trip  to  Washington,  D.  C.,  spending  $9,922.94.  The  Home- 
Finding  Committee  visited  several  cities  in  the  State  of 
Illinois  and  spent  $2,013.11  more  than  the  $10,000.00  pre- 
viously allotted  to  it  in  1913.  Senator  Barr's  committee 
to  inspect  the  walls  at  Joliet  spent  $5,000.  And  the  Com- 
mittee on  Efficiency  and  Economy  used  up  $40,000  of  real 
money.  While  not  all  the  expenses  are  for  traveling, 
provision  is  made  in  each  resolution  for  such  expenses. 

The  formation  of  so  many  committees  can  be  ac- 
counted for  by  the  loose  methods  which  prevailed  at 
Springfield.  If  a  member  thought  it  advantageous  to  in- 
vestigate, for  example,  the  subject  of  corn  flour,  he 
secured  the  recognition  of  the  Speaker,  introduced  his 
resolution  and  the  same  would  be  put  to  a  viva  voce  vote. 
No  record  of  the  vote  was  kept.  The  resolution  was  not 
treated  like  a  bill — carefully  printed,  read  three  times, 
passed  by  both  houses  and  approved  by  the  Governor. 

101 


As  soon  as  the  viva  voce  vote  was  taken  the  legislative 
act  was  finished  and  nothing  remained  but  the  naming  of 
the  committee.  It  is  almost  the  universal  custom  to  ap- 
point the  introducer  of  a  resolution  as  chairman;  hence, 
the  act  of  creating  a  committee  is  a  simple  matter  of  legis- 
lation. 

Fortunately  our  Supreme  Court  has  decided  in  the 
case  of  Fergus  v.  Eussell  that  such  committees  have  no 
legal  existence  after  the  final  adjournment  of  the  body 
which  created  them,  and,  in  the  future,  such  committees 
must  be  created  by  legislative  enactment  in  the  regular 
way. 

The  entire  list  of  committees  created  by  the  last  Leg- 
islature, which  the  Supreme  Court  has  declared  illegal,  is 
as  follows : 

Amt.  of 

No.  of  Appropri- 

Name  of  Committee —            Chairman.       Members.  ation. 

Investigation  of  Corn  Flour. .  Olson    5  $  1,000.00 

White  Slave  Committee Barratt  O'Hara.  . .     5  10,000.00 

Elections  Committee 10  

Economy  and  Efficiency Senator  Barr 11  35,000.00 

Centennial  Committee James,    Chairman.    15  18,500.00 

Chicago  Board  of  Education.. Baldwin 5  

Home-Finding  Committee. .  .Curran 10  10,000.00 

University  Commission G  4,000.00 

Codifying  Building  Laws Herlihy   6  3,000.00 

Insurance  Investigating  TJni-Andrus    10  

formity  of  Laws Swanson    10  

Investigation     of     Public 

Utilities _ McConnick 7  15,000.00 

Investigation  of  Pensions. 4  15,000.00 

Foot  and  Mouth  Disease Roos  .                     .   10  10,000.00 


114 
Extra  Salary. 

It  will  be  impossible  to  read  this  book  without  be- 
coming convinced  that  in  a  large  number  of  instances  the 
members  of  the  Legislature  attempted  to  increase  their 
income.  This  is  noticeable  in  the  Mileage  Case,  which  is 
treated  in  another  chapter. 

Several  members  received  pay  for  approving  the 
House  Journal.  At  the  close  of  each  session,  it  has  been 

102 


the  custom  to  appoint  a  committee  to  approve  the  House 
Journal.  On  June  19,  1915,  a  resolution  was  passed  by 
the  House  as  follows: 

"RESOLVED,  That  a  committee  of  seven  he  ap- 
pointed by  the  Speaker  to  approve  the  last  day's  Journal, 
after  the  adjournment  of  the  House." 

The  Speaker  appointed  Messrs.  Young,  Charles  Cur- 
ran,  Scholes,  Devereux,  Merritt,  Kilens  and  Smith. 

The  testimony  of  Representative  Merritt,  one  of  the 
foregoing  committee,  is  as  follows : 

Q.    Did  you  receive  your  salary?    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Did  you  receive  any  other  money  ? 

A.  Yes.  I  received  $50.00  for  examining  and  ap- 
proving the  Journal  on  a  committee. 

Q.     That  was  additional  salary? 

A.  That  was  additional.  I  did  not  know  there  was 
any  salary  attached  to  it,  and  I  found  a  warrant  sent  to 
me  by  mail,  and  then  I  discovered  they  paid  me  for  that 
service. 

Q.    Who  else  served  with  you  on  the  committee? 

A.     Well,  I  think  there  were  five. 

The  report  of  Auditor  Brady  shows  that  the  seven 
members  above  appointed  each  received  $50.00  for  exam- 
ining the  Journal  of  the  last  day.  By  reference  to  the 
Journal  of  the  House  of  June  30th,  it  appears  that  no 
business  was  transacted  on  June  30th;  that  the  House 
received  the  messages  from  the  Governor  and  adjourned. 
They  were  in  session,  all  told,  fifty-five  minutes. 

A  Page  in  History. 

This  book  has  dealt  largely  with  the  Legislature.  A 
number  of  serious-minded  men,  who  have  had  consider- 
able experience  at  Springfield  and  who  are  concerned 
with  laws  for  the  welfare  of  mankind,  have  been  attracted 
to  the  employment  of  pages  in  both  the  Senate  and  the 
Efouse.  During  the  proceedings  of  the  House  prior  to 
the  election  of  a  speaker,  Secretary  of  State  Stevenson 
appointed  at  one  time  forty-seven  of  these  youngsters — 
most  of  whom  were  under  fifteen  years  of  age — an  im- 
pressionable age,  as  the  father  of  any  child  knows.  These 

103 


boys  are  perfectly  aware  of  the  devious  methods  by  which 
money  is  extracted  from  the  public  treasury.  They  know 
many  men  are  on  the  payroll  who  do  not  pretend  to  do  any 
work  for  the  State.  When  I  was  in  the  Legislature  there 
were  many  resolutions  attempting  to  pay  pages  for  back 
services.  In  almost  every  case  we  were  morally  certain 
that  the  page  never  served,  and  that  he  was  merely  adopt- 
ing the  methods  of  grown-ups  in  getting  his  share  out  of 
the  treasury.  These  boys  think  this  is  smart  and  they 
rather  admire  a  man  who  can  put  it  over  throughout  an 
entire  session,  draw  his  money,  and,  as  the  slang  phrase 
goes,  ' '  get  away  with  it. ' ' 

It  has  never  been  my  experience  to  have  had  a  per- 
sonal talk  with  any  of  these  pages,  except  once,  and  that 
was  unsolicited. 

I  went  to  Springfield  in  the  summer  of  1915  to  attend 
court.  I  was  sitting  in  front  of  the  Leland  Hotel  when  a 
young  man  came  up  and  talked  to  me.  He  introduced 
himself,  saying  he  knew  me  well  and  that  he  thoroughly 
approved  of  the  work  which  I  was  doing.  He  said  he 
was  a  clerk  for  one  of  the  committees  and  that  he  was 
seventeen  years  old.  He  had  the  look  and  appearance 
of  a  young  fellow  inclined  to  be  over-dressy.  Our  talk 
dealt  with  the  affairs  at  Springfield  and  drifted  around 
to  the  double  payroll.  He  told  me  he  knew  of  a  large 
number  of  people  at  Springfield  who  would  be  on  two  and 
some  on  three  payrolls,  and,  of  course,  a  lot  of  other 
matters  dealing  with  irregularities  there.  As  we  talked 
he  became  somewhat  personal,  and  finally  admitted  that 
he  was  despondent  over  his  outlook.  It  seems  that  this 
boy  had  come  to  Springfield  the  session  before  to  serve 
as  a  page.  He  had  been  able  to  secure  extra  money  and 
in  one  way  or  another  make  a  living  until  the  present 
session,  at  which  time  he  had  become  a  clerk  of  a  com- 
mittee. He  admitted  he  was  a  pretty  hard  drinker;  in 
fact,  pretty  much  gone  to  pieces.  He  stated  to  me  the 
whole  trouble  was  that  as  a  young  fellow  he  received  too 
much  money;  that  it  came  too  easy  and  in  large  sums.  I 
became  interested  in  this  boy.  I  tried  to  help  him  and  to 
suggest  that  he  should  return  to  his  home  town,  enter  the 

104 


high  school  and  prepare  for  business  or  some  vocation. 
I  talked  over  with  him  one  or  two  lines  of  work  in  which 
I  thought  he  could  be  eminently  successful.  I  understand 
he  has  since  taken  up  studies,  and  I  sincerely  hope  he  will 
turn  out  all  right. 

At  the  time  I  had  this  conference  I  did  not  have  any 
information  concerning  the  amount  of  money  this  young 
fellow  got,  nor  did  I  know  much  about  his  history.  I  have 
since  seen  his  vouchers,  and  know  something  about  his 
conduct.  This  seventeen-year-old  boy  received  a  salary 
of  $3.00  a  day  for  167  days,  being  a  total  of  $501.00.  He 
also  received  two  extra  allowances :  one  of  $50.00  and  one 
of  $ 

At  one  time  during  the  last  session  of  the  Legisla- 
ture a  young  legislative  employe,  a  lad  of  seventeen,  took 
a  trip  to  the  City  of  Chicago  and  went  to  one  of  the  large 
hotels,  where  he  ordered  a  banquet  for  his  friends.  This 
was  a  regular  man's  dinner.  It  included  wine  and  cigars, 
and  the  bill,  which  was  nearly  $150.00,  was  paid  by  the 
State. 

Among  the  young  fellows  who  serve  as  pages  are 
boys  from  good  families.  Some  of.  the  members  bring 
their  young  sons  with  them  and  have  them  serve  in  that 
capacity.  A  new  system  should  be  inaugurated  and  the 
methods  of  the  Legislature  materially  changed  if  the 
youngsters  are  to  be  employed  in  such  a  capacity.  I 
sincerely  hope  that  the  instance  which  I  have  above  quoted 
is  not  usual  or  even  typical.  Among  the  clerks  I  knew 
some  young  men  who  were  extremely  high  class,  and  who 
came  to  Springfield  to  have  the  benefit  of  the  experience 
which  the  positions  offered  to  them.  The  instance  which  I 
have  spoken  of  was  the  first  glimpse  I  had  ever  had  of  the 
life  of  a  young  fellow  still  in  his  teens  who  was  receiving 
the  full  benefit  of  a  system  inherently  wrong. 


105 


DEFICIENCY  BILLS. 

An  entire  book  could  be  written  upon  the  Deficiency 
Bills  presented  in  the  year  1915.  This  chapter  will  be  a 
mere  outline  of  these  appropriations  and  an  attempt  in  a 
general  way  to  explain  why  these  appropriations  are  bad. 

An  appropriation  is  an  authority  to  a  State  official  to 
spend  a  certain  limited  amount  within  a  limited  period — 
namely,  two  years.  The  Constitution  makes  careful  re- 
.strictions  upon  this  point,  and  the  reason  is  apparent. 
The  State  cannot  be  sued ;  therefore,  the  State  should  not 
contract  for  a  greater  sum  of  money  than  it  can  pay. 
Such  a  contract  would  be  morally  wrong. 

When  each  General  Assembly  is  about  to  adjourn  it 
estimates  the  gross  amounts  of  its  appropriations  for  the 
coming  two  years,  and  then  passes  what  is  known  as  a 
Eevenue  Law.  In  other  words,  it  makes  provision  for 
securing  its  future  purchases  and  expenses  by  securing 
money  through  taxation.  In  this  nicely  balanced  system 
no  obligation  will  be  incurred  for  which  there  is  not  suffi- 
cient money  in  the  treasury — at  least  potentially  there. 
Now,  if  some  officer  should  exceed  his  authority  and  pur- 
chase more  than  authorized,  or  increase  his  payroll 
greater  than  contemplated,  there  would  be  created  a 
moral  debt.  If  this  exceeded  the  revenues,  a  difficulty 
arises  as  to  its  payment.  Three  sections  of  the  Consti- 
tution, according  to  my  contention,  provide  against  all 
such  contingencies  and  take  from  the  Legislature  the 
power  to  pay  such  moral  obligations. 

In  private  life,  an  agent  who  is  authorized  to  spend 
money  for  another  may  violate  his  authority  and  be  guilty 
of  no  crime.  In  some  instances  the  agent  might  embar- 
rass his  principal,  and,  in  fact,  do  him  a  great  wrong, 
but  he  would  at  most  be  liable  only  in  a  civil  proceeding. 

This  is  not  so  in  the  State,  for  a  special  statute  has 
been  created  making  such  an  action  criminal.  It  reads  as 
follows : 

11  Every  person  holding  any  public  office   (whether 

106 


State,  County  or  Municipal)  *  *  *  who  shall  be  guilty 
of  contracting,  directly  or  indirectly,  for  the  expenditure 
of  a  greater  sum  or  amount  of  money  than  may  have 
been  at  the  time  of  making  the  contracts  appropriated 
or  set  apart  by  law  or  authorized  by  law  to  be  contracted 
for  or  expended  upon  the  subject-matter  of  the  contracts 
*  *  *  shall  be  fined  not  exceeding  $10,000.00,  and  may 
be  removed  from  his  office,  trust  or  employment." 

Regardless  of  the  constitutional  restrictions  above 
referred  to,  deficiencies  were  created  and  appropriations 
made  therefor  as  follows: 

S.  B.  159  (Canaday)—  Deficiency  of  Pub.  Util.  Com.  .$  35,000.00 

S.  B.  316  (Barr)—  Deficiency,  Joliet  Ten 125,000.00 

S.  B.  464  (Curtis)— Deficiency,  Livestock  Com'rs 3.000.00 

II. B.    79  (Merritt)— Deficiency,  Insurance  Supt 26,000.00 

H.  B.  102  (Shepard)—  Deficiency,  Industrial  Board 29,965.00 

H.B.  209  (Bruce)— Deficiency,  Auditor  of  Pub.  Accts. .  4.500.00 

H.B.  256  (Smejkal)— Deficiency,  Secretary  of  State.  . .  13,823.12 

H.B.  340  (Igoe)— Deficiency,  And.  of  Pub.  Accts 20,000.00 

H.B.  528  (Com.   on   App.) — Deficiency,   Com'rs   State 

Contract .* 85,000.00 

S.  B.  495  (Smith)— Deficiency,  Vredenburgh,  et  al 25,104.25 

H.B.  541  (Gorman) — Deficiency,  Chief  Insp.  Priv.Emp. 

Agency 5,000.00 

H.B.  574  (Smejkal)— Deficiency,  Leg.  Eef.  Bureau 15,000.00 

H.  B.  586  (Morris)— Deficiency,  Southern  111.  Pen 19,036.50 

H.  B.  730  (Com.   on  App.)— Deficiency,   Clerk  of  Su- 
preme Ct 3,375.00 

To  the  passage  of  these  bills  there  was  strenuous 
opposition. 

Walter  Provine,  of  Taylorville,  and  W.  J.  Graham,  of 
Aledo,  led  the  debate  in  the  House,  while  Senator  K  S. 
Smith,  himself  a  former  member  of  the  Attorney-Gen- 
eral's office,  presented  an  argument  in  the  Senate  which 
no  Senator  attempted  to  answer. 

In  these  debates  is  given  the  meat  of  the  objections, 
and  I  therefore  quote  what  these  Representatives  and 
Senator  said.  Mr.  Graham  says  (House  Debates,  page 
305): 

"I  desire  to  explain  my  views  briefly  as  to  the  merits 
of  this  proposition.  This  bill  seems  to  be  one  to  take  care 
of  the  deficiency  in  the  office  of  the  Auditor  of  Public  Ac- 

107 


counts.  What  I  have  to  say  about  this  proposition  is  not 
from  a  political  standpoint.  I  have  been  advised  by  those 
to  whom  I  naturally  look  for  counsel  on  these  matters  that 
questions  of  this  kind  have  not  been  considered  political 
questions,  and  I  wish  to  assure  you  that  in  anything  I 
have  to  say  there  is  no  political  slant  to  it. 

' '  This  is  one  of  a  series  of  bills  that  have  been  com- 
ing into  this  House.  I  have  tried  to  be  consistent  in  my 
attitude  in  this  matter  and  refused  to  vote  for  them  so 
far  as  I  knew  them  to  be  deficiencies.  I  have  done  so  on 
the  theory  I  stated  yesterday,  that  I  considered  to  be 
illegal.  It  is  not  a  political  question,  but  it  is  a  question 
where  every  man  must  follow  the  dictates  of  his  own  con- 
science and  must  do  the  thing  which  he  considers  for  the 
best  interest  of  himself  and  the  people  of  the  State  whom 
he  represents. 

''This  matter  of  deficiencies,  as  I  have  investigated 
them,  has  been  gradually  growing  in  this  State,  and  it 
should  be  stopped  now.  I  want  to  call  to  your  attention 
some  of  the  deficiency  appropriations  as  I  have  culled 
them  from  the  session  laws.  It  has  been  a  laborious  task, 
but  I  have  tried  to  find  out  what  former  Legislatures  have 
done  before  this  one.  In  1899  I  find  only  two,  one  for 
returning  fugitives  from  justice,  and  the  other  for  print- 
ing, amounting  in  all  to  $7,000.00.  You  will  remember 
that  from  the  very  nature  of  the  case  an  appropriation 
for  the  purpose  of  returning  fugitives  from  justice  is 
something  that  has  to  be  taken  care  of  in  that  way.  The 
same  thing  might  be  true  of  printing,  but  the  principle 
that  applies,  applies  in  all  of  them. 

"In  1903,  the  deficiencies  were  for  the  same  purpose 
and  amounted  to  $8,000.  In  1905,  the  printing  bill  swelled 
to  $41,000,  and  the  total  deficit  was  $44,000.00. 

In  1907,  it  dropped  back  to  $18,000.  The  Secretary 
of  State,  in  that  year,  asked  for  $7,500.  In  1909,  there 
was  a  deficiency  of  $62,000.  In  1911,  there  was  a  defi- 
ciency of  $50,000  for  printing,  and  the  Live  Stock  Board 
asked  for  $3,000.  In  1913,  there  was  a  total  deficiency 
of  $285,378." 

(Interruption.) 

108 


Mr.  Graham  (Mercer):  ''Let  me  conclude  my  re- 
marks. I  have  stated  in  the  beginning  of  my  remarks  that 
the  matter  has  no  political  complexion  at  all.  It  is  a 
question  of  economy  and  honesty,  and  it  is  a  question  of 
doing  what  the  law  required  us  to  do,  keep  these  things 
within  the  legitimate  channels. 

"What  the  deficiency  appropriations  may  be  in  this 
Legislature,  God  alone  knows.  They  are  coming  in  here 
day  after  day  and  some  of  them  are  held  back  and  some 
of  them  aggregate  over  $100,000.  I  don't  purpose  to  be 
a  party  to  what  I  consider  to  be  a  crime.  I  don't  intend 
to  do  something  that  I  think  is  against  the  letter  of  the 
law.  Let  me  ask  you,  don't  we  know  that  when  we  vote 
for  these  deficiencies  that  we  are  doing  something  that 
we  ought  not  to  do  ?  We  say,  how  are  we  going  to  stop 
it,  the  practice  has  arisen  and  they  have  done  it  in  the 
past?  Let  me  say  to  you  that  just  as  long  as  we  are  parti- 
ceps  crimini,  and  when  we  approve  these  measures,  just 
so  long  will  that  practice  continue.  If  we  say  to  the  fel- 
low that  contracts  these  bills  in  violation  of  the  law  and 
the  contractors  that  furnish  the  stuff  in  violation  of  the 
law  that  you  will  not  pay  these  bills,  then  the  practice 
will  stop. 

"What  is  the  Legislature  for?  It  is  to  make  an 
appropriation  for  the  conduct  of  the  business  of  the 
State. 

"A  State  officer  is  a  hired  man  of  this  State.  He  is 
hired  to  do  a  certain  job  and  we  give  him  so  much 
money.  What  right  has  he  to  spend  a  great  deal  in 
excess  of  that  sum  of  money?  If  that  is  the  way  these 
things  are  to  be  conducted,  what  is  the  use  of  a  Legisla- 
ture? 

"I  appreciate  that  my  position  in  this  matter  is  not 
a  popular  one  and  I  am  getting  myself  in  bad  about  these 
things  by  making  these  statements  at  this  time,  but  I  am 
doing  it  because  I  believe  I  am  expressing  the  sentiments 
of  three-fourths  of  the  members  of  this  House  to-day. 

"The  burdens  of  taxation  have  arisen  in  this  State 
at  a  .frightful  rate,  and  everyone  is  complaining  about 
the  burdens  of  taxation.  I  will  call  your  attention  to  a 

109 


few  figures  and  again  impress  upon  you  that  this  is  not  a 
political  question. 

"I  find  in  1911  the  expense  of  the  Auditor's  office 
was  $4,469,000,  and  in  1913,  only  two  years  afterward, 
it  was  $6,518,000,  or  an  increase  of  thirty-six  per  cent  in 
two  years  for  the  carrying  on  of  the  expenses  of  that 
office.  What  happened  in  two  years  to  make  this  great 
increase?" 

Mr.  Graham  was  followed  by  Mr.  Walter  Provine, 
who  said  (House  Debates,  pages  308  and  309) : 

''On  the  30th  of  last  March  I  introduced  a  resolution 
that  was  read  and  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Appro- 
priations, the  purport  of  which  was  to  find  out  how  many 
deficiency  appropriation  bills  there  were  in  the  House. 
That  has  never  been  reported  from  the  committee.  One 
reason  is,  it  is  not  known  yet  how  many  deficiency  appro- 
priations there  will  be.  I  have  no  way  of  knowing  how 
many  deficiency  appropriation  bills  there  will  be  before 
this  House.  I  think  it  is  only  fair  and  right  that  we 
should  know. 

"Usually  in  the  houses  of  Congress  the  matter  of 
appropriation  bills  is  a  matter  of  keenest  debate,  and  I 
think  that  is  something  that  should  be  debated  in  this 
House.  The  taxpayers  are  interested  in  the  amount  of 
money  that  the  General  Assembly  appropriates  every  two 
years.  You  hear  a  good  deal  about  the  raising  of  the 
tax  rate,  and  there  is  not  a  member  of  the  Legislature 
that  can  talk  to  a  citizen  in  an  intelligent  way  and  tell 
him  how  many  deficiency  bills  there  are  before  the  House, 

and  why  they  come  up. ' ' 

*         *         #         * 

"In  regard  to  government  appropriations  that  are 
made  for  the  construction  of  government  buildings,  post- 
offices  and  things  of  that  kind,  whenever  the  appropria- 
tion runs  out  the  work  stops,  and  it  doesn't  make  any 
difference  what  the  progress  of  the  building  is,  whether 
the  foundation  has  been  laid,  or  whether  the  first,  second 
or  third  story  has  been  completed  or  the  roof  is  not  on. 
That  work  stops,  as  everyone  knows  he  cannot  spend 
money  in  excess  of  his  appropriation.  When  Congress 

no 


meets  it  appropriates  a  sufficient  sum  of  money  to  com- 
plete that  work. 

"I  have  been  informed  that  when  House  Bill  209 
came  in  that  it  was  not  itemized.  A  request  was  made 
by  a  number  of  members  of  the  committee  that  it  be 
itemized.  Here  are  some  of  the  figures :  Postage  $1,200, 
telegraph  and  telephone  $400,  expressage — with  a  ques- 
tion mark  after  it — $100,  traveling  expenses  $300,  inci- 
dentals, water,  ice  and  supplies,  $300.  The  Forty-eighth 
General  Assembly  made  an  appropriation  for  this  pur- 
pose in  the  sum  of  $10,000.00.  They  have  spent  that  and 
$2,300  in  addition.  The  head  of  that  department  knew 
what  he  had  to  go  on  for  two  years  and  he  disregarded 
that,  and  still  he  comes  in  with  a  deficiency  appropriation 

for  such  things  as  ice,  newspapers  and  supplies." 

*         *         *         * 

''The  gentleman  from  Mercer  (Graham)  has  gone 
into  this  matter  and  has  stated  it  is  not  political,  and  I 
assure  you  that  the  stand  I  take  is  not  political.  It  has 
happened  under  Republican  administrations  the  same  as 
under  Democratic,  but  the  trouble  is  that  it  is  growing 
all  the  time.  If  we  don't  stop  it  now  there  never  will  be 
a  chance  to  stop  it. ' ' 

When  the  bills  reached  the  Senate,  Senator  Smith 
made  the  following  argument  (Sen.  Deb.,  1207) : 

"Mr.  President  and  Senators:  In  reply  to  the  ques- 
tion, I  wish  to  state  that  the  Constitution  of  this  State 
provides  that  each  General  Assembly  shall  provide  for  all 
appropriations  necessary  for  the  ordinary  and  contingent 
expenses  of  the  Government  until  the  expiration  of  the 
first^  fiscal  quarter  after  the  adjournment  of  the  next  Gen- 
eral Assembly.  The  Constitution  also  provides  that  the 
General  Assembly  shall  never  grant  any  extra  compen- 
sation, fee  or  allowance  to  any  public  officer,  agent,  serv- 
ant or  contractor,  after  service  has  been  rendered  or  a 
contract  made,  nor  authorize  the  payment  of  any  claim, 
or  part  thereof,  hereafter  created  against  the  State  under 
any  agreement  or  contract  made  without  express  author- 
ity of  law.  We  spend  our  time  here  considering  the 
appropriations  that  shall  be  made  to  the  different  depart- 
ill 
J 


ments.  Of  what  good  is  it  if,  after  we  have  considered 
what  appropriations  shall  be  made,  the  department  is 
then  to  proceed  without  regard  to  those  appropriations 
and  expend  whatever  money  or  incur  whatever  liability 
it  pleases  after  the  appropriation  is  made?  When  this 
General  Assembly  says  what  the  departments  may  do, 
and  makes  the  appropriations  for  the  employment  of  the 
necessary  clerks  to  do  that  thing,  the  General  Assembly 
is  given  the  express  authority,  and  when  the  departments 
proceed  in  defiance  of  that  they  are  doing  something  not 
expressly  authorized  by  law.  We  have  in  this  General 
Assembly  passed  deficiency  bills  to  the  amount  of  $377,- 
000 ;  $377,000  of  liabilities  incurred  by  these  different  de- 
partments beyond  the  amounts  that  the  last  General  As- 
sembly said  they  might  incur,  beyond  the  liability  that 
they  have  the  right  to  incur,  beyond  the  amount  that  they 
were  authorized  by  the  General  Assembly  and  the  Consti- 
tution. They  were  wholly  unauthorized  and  should  not 
be  continued." 

Of  the  list  of  appropriations,  the  one  for  the  Swine 
and  Sheep  Pavilion  is  interesting  in  both  its  substance 
and  the  story  of  its  passage. 

Back  in  1911  the  General  Assembly  appropriated  to 
the  State  Board  of  Agriculture  the  sum  of  $125,000.00 
for  a  swine  and  sheep  pavilion.  This  appropriation  re- 
ceived the  approval  of  the  Governor  on  June  9th,  1911. 

Full  preparations  were  made  for  the  making  of  these 
improvements.  Detailed  plans  and  specifications  were 
prepared  and  in  due  course  of  time  a  contract  was  let  to 
one  J.  F.  Duncan  for  the  sum  of  $123,680.00.  Duncan  was 
required  to  execute  a  bond  to  the  State  Board  of  Agricul- 
ture for  the  faithful  performance  of  his  contract. 

According  to  the  original  appropriation,  no  money 
could  be  drawn  from  the  State  Treasury  without  the  ap- 
proval of  three  persons — the  President,  the  Secretary  of 
the  State  Board  of  Agriculture  and  the  Governor  of  the 
State.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  Legislature  in- 
tended to  safeguard  this  money,  for  the  Appropriation 
Act  of  1911  was  clear  and  explicit.  Tn  Section  2  it  said : 

"That,  on  the  order  of  the  president,  countersigned 

112 


by  the  secretary  of  the  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  and 
approved  by  the  Governor,  the  Auditor  of  Public  Ac- 
counts shall  draw  his  warrant  upon  the  State  Treasurer 
in  favor  of  the  treasurer  of  the  Illinois  State  Board  of 
Agriculture  for  the  sums  herein  appropriated:  PRO- 
VIDED, that  all  of  said  money  shall  be  paid  in  install- 
ments from  time  to  time,  as  the  same  shall  be  needed  to 
pay  for  the  improvements  authorized  by  this  Act,  and  on 
vouchers  to  be  approved  by  the  Governor." 

From  time  to  time  installments  of  money  were  paid 
out  of  this  appropriation,  and  the  buildings  were  com- 
pleted. But  it  seems  that  upon  the  completion  of  the 
buildings  there  was  $10,000.00  still  at  the  disposal  of  the 
State  Board  of  Agriculture,  but  Duncan  had  not  paid  his 
sub-contractors,  and  there  were  outstanding  bills  against 
Duncan,  the  contractor,  amounting  to  $35,703.69. 

With  Duncan  in  default,  these  sub-contractors 
brought  a  suit  against  the  State  Board  of  Agriculture 
to  have  the  $10,000  turned  over  to  them. 

The  foregoing  is  merely  a  matter  of  history.  The 
sum  of  $10,000  was  awarded  by  a  decree  of  the  Circuit 
Court  to  the  sub-contractors,  but  there  was  still  owing  to 
them  the  sum  of  $25,703.69.  These  sub-contractors  natu- 
rally turned  their  eyes  towards  the  State  Treasury.  In 
this  repository  of  vast  wealth,  acquired  from  the  tax- 
payers of  the  State,  were  ample  funds  to  pay  this 
small  claim.  The  creditors  of  Duncan  decided  that  it 
would  be  an  easy  matter  to  secure  this  money  from,  the 
State  Treasury,  and  so,  on  May  13th,  Senator  E.  S.  Smith, 
a  lawyer  residing  in  Springfield  and  representing  the 
Springfield  district,  introduced  Senate  Bill  495.  The 
bill  tells  the  whole  story. 

"AN  ACT  TO  MAKE  AN  APPROPRIATION  TO 
PAY  CERTAIN  SUB-CONTRACTORS,  MATERIAL 
MEN  AND  LABORERS  FOR  MATERIAL  FUR- 
NISHED AND  WORK  DONE  IN  THE  CONSTRUC- 
TION OF  THE  SHEEP  AND  SWINE  PAVILIONS  AT 
THE  STATE  FAIR  GROUNDS. 

"WHEREAS,  The  47th  General  Assembly  passed  an 

113 


act  appropriating  $125,000  for  the  construction  of  sheep 
and  swine  pavilions  on  the  State  fair  grounds,  and 

"WHEREAS,  Contract  was  let  to  J.  F.  Duncan  for 
the  construction  of  said  buildings  for  the  sum  of  $123,680, 
and 

"  WHEREAS,  Said  J.  F.  Duncan  defaulted  in  the  con- 
struction of  said  work  and  in  the  payment  of  workmen, 
material  men  and  sub-contractors  on  said  buildings  and 
the  persons  named  herein  furnished  material  and  did 
work  in  the  construction  of  said  buildings  to  the  amounts 
respectively  stated  herein  above  all  payments  made  to 
them  and  for  which  no  payment  has  been  made,  and 

"  WHERE  AS,  Said  buildings  have  been  completed 
by  the  State  Board  of  Agriculture  since  the  default  and 
abandonment  of  said  work  by  said  J.  F.  Duncan  and  the 
amounts  herein  stated  are  due  and  unpaid  to  the  persons 
named  respectively  for  work  done  and  material  furnished 
for  said  buildings,  to-wit: 

Burtle  and  Miller $  1,23-1.30 

E.  G.  George,  surviving  partner  of  George  Brothers.  . .  .     6,847.00 

J.  A.  Wise  &  Son 3,495.20 

Kachford  Brothers    1,475.00 

M.  J.  Baum  Monument  &  Stone  Works 994.33 

E.  W.  Hocker  &  Son 583.14 

Earl  Seymour 30.00 

Andrew  McClerran 19.50 

C.  Frazer 36.50 

J.  Landfeld 35.68 

John  McLaughlin 13.00 

A.  M.  Seymour 30.00 

Federal  Terra  Cotta  Company 520.22 

R.  Hass  (Haas)  Electric  &  Manufacturing  Co 2,353.83 

T.  D.  Vredenburg 1,995.30 

Peter  Vredenburg  Lumber  Co 14.022.83 

H.  C.  Rogers  927.80 

L.  H.  Zumbrook  &  Co 455.00 

W.  E.  Emerson  635.00 

and 

"WHEREAS,  There  is  now  in  the  treasury  of  the 
State  Board  of  Agriculture  only  the  sum  of  $10,000  of 
said  above-named  appropriation  available  for  the  pay- 
ment of  the  said  amounts  due  to  said  sub-contractors, 
material  men  and  laborers,  and 

114 


"WHEREAS,  There  will  remain  due  and  unpaid  to 
said  persons  after  the  pro  rata  distribution  of  said  $10,- 
000  the  amounts  set  forth  in  the  following  bill,  now,  there- 
fore, 

"SECTION  1.  BE  IT  ENACTED  BY  THE  PEO- 
PLE OF  THE  STATE  OF  ILLINOIS,  REPRE- 
SENTED IN  THE  GENERAL  ASSEMBLY:  That 
there  be  and  is  hereby  appropriated  to  the  persons  here- 
inafter named  the  amounts  set  opposite  their  names  re- 
spectively as  full  compensation  for  the  amounts  due  them 
for  work  done  and  material  furnished  for  the  construc- 
tion of  the  sheep  and  swine  pavilions  on  the  State  fair 
grounds  after  distribution  of  the  balance  of  $10,000,  now 
in  the  treasury  of  the  State  Board  of  Agriculture,  to-wit : 

Burtle  &  Miller $      888.62 

E.  G.  George,  surviving  partner  of  George  Brothers  ....  4,929. 02 

J.  A.  Wise  &  Son 2,517.18 

Eachford  Brothers 1,061.84 

M.  J.  Baum  Monument  &  Stone  Works 716.01 

E.  W.  Hocker  &  Son 419.80 

Federal  Terra  Cotta  Co 374.61 

E.  Hass  (Hass)  Electric  &  Mfg.  Co 1,694.54 

T.  B.  Vredenburg 1,436.42 

Peter  Vredenburg  Lumber  Co 10,094.98 

H.  C.  Eogers 667.88 

L.  H.  Zumbrook  &  Co 327.55 

W.  E.  Emerson  457.13 

Earl  Seymour 21.60 

Andrew  McLarren 14.04 

C.  Frazer   26.28 

J.  Landfelt 25.83 

John  McLaughlin   9.36 

A.  M.  Seymour 21.60 

''SECTION  2.  The  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts  is 
hereby  authorized  and  directed  to  draw  his  warrants  in 
favor  of  the  above-named  parties  for  the  amounts  set 
opposite  their  names  respectively,  payable  out  of  any 
moneys  in  the  State  Treasury  not  otherwise  appropriated. 

"Approved  June  29,  1915." 

No  one  acquainted  with  Springfield  and  the  49th 
General  Assembly  can  overlook  the  familiar  figure  of 
Tom  Vredenburg.  His  magnificent,  high-powered  motor 

115 


car,  of  creamy  white  color,  with  red  running  gear,  was 
often  filled  with  legislators.  He  fairly  haunted  the  legis- 
lative chambers  and  the  committee  rooms.  No  man  ever 
''plugged"  for  the  passage  of  a  bill  as  did  Tom  Vreden- 
burg  for  Senate  Bill  495.  His  motive  was  in  no  sense 
altruistic.  It  was  private,  individualistic.  If  the  bill 
passed  there  would  be  the  taking  from  the  Public  Treas- 
ury for  the  Vredenburgs  the  sum  of  $11,531.40.  The 
bill  did  pass,  and  the  Governor  approved  it  on  June  29, 
1915. 

I  feel  confident  in  stating  that  no  appropriation  of 
money  violated  more  clauses  of  the  Constitution  than  did 
this  one.  Here  are  four  provisions  of  the  Constitution 
especially  designed  to  prevent  this  sort  of  thing :  First, 
the  General  Assembly  shall  make  no  appropriation  of 
money  out  of  the  treasury  in  any  private  law  (Section 
16  of  Article  IV) ;  second,  the  State  shall  never  pay,  as- 
sume or  become  responsible  for  the  debts  or  liabilities  of 
or  in,  any  manner  make  a  loan  or  extend  its  credit  to 
or  in  aid  of  any  public  or  other  corporation,  association 
or  individual  (Section  20,  Article  IV) ;  third,  the  General 
Assembly  shall  never  grant  or  authorize  extra  compensa- 
tion, fee  or  allowance  to  any  public  officer,  agent  or  con- 
tractor after  the  service  has  been  rendered  or  a  contract 
made,  nor  authorize  the  payment  of  any  claim,  or  part 
thereof,  hereafter  created  against  the  State  under  any 
agreement  or  contract  made  without  express  authority 
of  law ;  and  all  such  unauthorized  agreements  or  contracts 
shall  be  null  and  void.  (Section  19  of  Article  IV) ;  fourth, 
this  objection  is  the  one  contained  in  Section  18  of  Article 
IV,  out  of  which  arises  the  general  doctrine  of  deficiency, 
which  I  attempted  to  set  forth  at  the  beginning  of  this 
chapter. 

The  discussion  of  what  constitutes  a  private  relief, 
and  whether  or  not  this  appropriation  to  Vredenburg, 
and  others,  is  a  private  relief  has  been  taken  up  in  an- 
other chapter  in  this  book. 

If  Sections  19  and  20  of  the  Constitution  do  not  pro- 
hibit the  payment  of  these  bills,  then  it  seems  that  a 
medium  other  than  language  must  be  invented  to  express 

116 


an  idea.  It  is  not  my  purpose  to  present  a  brief  nor  to 
make  an  argument.  This  is  not  written  for  lawyers  and 
is  not  intended  as  a  legal  argument. 

Even  confining  ourselves  to  the  facts  set  forth  in  the 
enactment,  it  is  very  clear  to  the  layman  that  the  State 
did  pay  the  debts  of  Mr.  Duncan.  It  also  becomes  very 
clear  that  the  State  did  authorize  extra  compensation 
and  extra  allowance  to  a  contractor  for  services  after 
the  same  had  been  performed,  and  contract  made,  and 
it  is  also  clear  that  the  State  has  paid  claims  for  which 
there  was  no  express  authority  of  law. 

The  State  Board  of  Agriculture  did  not  ask  the  State 
of  Illinois  for  any  additional  funds,  but  some  outsiders 
claim  that  in  addition  to  the  amount  of  the  contract  there 
is  due  and  owing  $25,703.69  and  these  outsiders  request 
an  additional  appropriation. 

Undoubtedly  these  men  should  be  paid  if  they  fur- 
nished material,  but  Duncan  was  the  debtor,  not  the  State. 

Who  is  to  blame ! 

First — The  hopelessly  extravagant  49th  General  As- 
sembly. 

Second — The  Attorney-General,  through  whose  hands 
this  bill  passed  before  it  was  signed  by  the  Governor. 

Third — The  Governor,  whose  veto  in  all  probability 
would  have  killed  the  bill. 

Fourth — The  Auditor,  who  could  have  refused  to 
draw  warrants  for  payment. 

Fifth — The  State  Treasurer,  who  might  have  refused 
to  honor  the  warrants. 


117 


PBIVATE  BELIEF  BILLS 

I  have  examined  at  some  length  the  Constitutional 
Debates  of  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  1870.  One 
of  the  evils  which  they  desired  to  correct  was  log-rolling. 
Another  evil  was  the  refunding  of  money  to  county  col- 
lectors. It  seems  that  years  ago  county  collectors  would 
leave  home  with  the  amount  of  money  owing  to  the  State 
and  on  their  way  between  their  homes  and  the  State  Capi- 
tol would  be  robbed.  Being  robbed  did  not  exonerate 
them  from  making  the  payment  and  they  would,  there- 
fore, be  obliged  to  settle  with  the  State.  This  apparent 
injustice  was  corrected  by  the  next  session  of  the  Legis- 
lature. The  man  who  had  been  robbed  was  reimbursed 
for  the  amount  of  his  loss.  These  robberies  kept  increas- 
ing and  reached  such  a  proportion  that  the  people  of  the 
State  became  incensed  and  resolved  to  stop  the  robberies. 
Therefore,  a  provision  was  inserted  in  the  Constitution. 
This  provided  that  the  General  Assembly  shall  make  no 
appropriation  from  the  treasury  in  any  private  law.  The 
members  of  the  convention  felt  that  such  a  provision  in 
the  Constitution  would  stop  robberies.  While  it  may  not 
be  entirely  clear  to  the  reader,  the  fact  is  that  since  1870 
no  bill  has  ever  been  presented  to  the  Legislature  to  re- 
imburse any  county  treasurer  for  having  the  State  funds 
stolen. 

Upon  the  log-rolling  proposition :  It  becomes  appa- 
rent, if  there  is  a  large  number  of  bills,  each  one  seeking 
to  pay  directly  a  certain  person  a  certain  sum  of  money, 
there  will  spring  up  a  community  of  interest  among  the 
backers  of  the  bills.  If  there  are  enough  of  these  bills 
to  constitute  a  majority  of  either  branch  of  the  House, 
it  becomes  certain  that  the  bills  are  going  to  pass.  Now, 
in  the  Senate,  the  majority  is  twenty-six.  In  the  last 
Legislature  there  were  forty  bills  known  as  private  re- 
lief bills.  The  amount  of  money  involved  in  these  bills 
ran  up  to  about  $200,000.  If  each  bill  had  a  separate 

118 


proponent  in  the  Senate,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  the  bills 
would  readily  pass  that  body. 

In  the  House  there  were  forty  members  who  repre- 
sented as  many  different  bills  of  this  character  and  they 
were  most  insistent  that  their  bills  receive  a  hearing. 
Matters  of  general  legislation  were  many  times  side- 
tracked that  these  private  relief  bills  might  go  through. 
Twenty-two  of  them  did  pass  and  all  but  two  received  the 
approval  of  the  Governor.  Of  those  which  did  pass,  a 
few  have  been  paid,  but  the  greater  number  remain  un- 
paid and  are  now  subject  to  litigation.  The  contention  is 
that  the  wording  of  the  Constitution  makes  it  impossible 
to  pay  out  any  money  in  any  such  case. 

It  would  be  difficult  to  invent  a  phrase  and  place  it 
in  the  constitution  which  is  plainer  than  the  provision 
above  quoted,  the  application  of  which  would  not  apply 
to  this  class  of  cases.  It  is  not  the  purpose  of  this  book 
to  go  into  all  of  the  private  relief  bills  presented.  Two 
of  them,  however,  present  unusual  features.  One  bill, 
Senate  Bill  No.  425,  was  for  the  private  relief  of  Hannah 
Bruce.  It  set  forth  in  its  preamble  that  Hannah  Bruce 's 
daughter  was  injured  in  the  public  schools  of  Chicago 
and  that  the  expense  of  doctors'  bills  and  otherwise 
amounted  to  $2,600.  Hannah  Bruce  is  the  wife  of  Eep- 
resentative  Bruce.  This  appropriation  passed  the  House 
and  the  Senate,  received  the  Governor's  approval  and 
was  paid. 

The  bill  does  not  even  claim  the  child  was  hurt 
through  the  negligence  of  the  Board  of  Education.  Upon 
the  merits  of  the  case,  it  is  difficult  to  see  why  a  taxpayer 
living  outside  of  the  City  of  Chicago  should  be  obliged 
to  pay  for  this  injury.  This  is,  of  course,  assuming  that 
it  is  proper  to  make  private  appropriations.  If  the  con- 
stitutional restriction  applies  to  all  private  bills,  the  ques- 
tion of  the  justice  to  the  various  taxpayers  would  not 
apply. 

Another  bill  introduced  is  known  as  the  Akhurst  bill. 
It  was  introduced  by  Eepresentative  Dudgeon.  It  showed 
that  James  Akhurst  was  at  one  time  the  owner  of  a  canal 
boat;  that  through  the  negligence  of  the  State  of  Illi- 

119 


nois  the  canal  boat  was  sunk.  The  boat  was  valued  at 
$1,289.86.  Now,  this  boat  was  loaded  with  corn  which 
had  a  value  of  $3,206;  therefore,  said  the  bill:  "Be  it 
enacted  that  there  be  paid  to  the  heirs  of  James  Akhurst 
the  sum  of  $16,905." 

The  discrepancy  between  the  total  value  of  the  canal 
boat  and  the  corn  is  in  nowise  due  to  the  injured  feel- 
ings of  James  Akhurst  at  the  loss  of  his  canal  boat;  nor 
is  it  due  to  any  pain  or  suffering,  but  it  is  the  interest 
which  the  State  should  pay,  computed  at  6  per  cent  from 
May  12,  1866,  which  is  the  date  of  this  lamentable  acci- 
dent. 

We  have  in  the  State  of  Illinois  a  Court  of  Claims. 
It  is  a  regular  institution,  composed  of  three  members 
who  receive  annually  a  salary  of  $1,500  each.  This  court 
lays  down  rules  for  the  presentation  of  any  claims  against 
the  State.  No  lawyer  is  required.  There  are  no  techni- 
calities. Any  person  who  has  a  claim  may  appear  before 
the  Board  and  present  his  claim.  The  Attorney-General 
will  be  notified  and  appear.  He  will  defend  on  behalf  of 
the  State  and  the  judgment  of  the  Court  of  Claims  will 
be  final.  When  the  Legislature  acts  upon  private  claims 
it  does  not  notify  the  Attorney-General.  There  is  no 
cross-examination.  No  evidence-  presented  to  dispute  the 
nature  of  the  claim- — it  is  exparte  and  based  entirely 
upon  the  representations  of  the  party  desiring  the  money. 
In  fact,  it  takes  on  the  nature  of  a  mere  gratuity.  It 
opens  wide  the  door  of  the  State  Treasury. 

For  claims  against  the  State,  there  is  a  tribunal 
and  no  taxpayer  of  the  State  should  object  to  its  judg- 
ment. The  State  of  Illinois  is  as  honorably  bound  to  pay 
its  obligations  as  a  private  individual. 

Private  relief  bills  passed  by  the  49th  General  As- 
sembly : 

S.  B.  400  (Swanson),  relief  Frank  Holterman $  3,000.00 

S.  B.  425  (Gorman),  relief  Hannah  Bruce 2,600.00 

H.  B.     14  (Burres),  relief  Van  Roy  Barnes 1,500.00 

H.  B.     76  (Maucker),  relief  Cornelius  Donovan 1,700.00 

H.  B.     85  (O'Connell),  relief  Walter  0.  Jones 1,000.00 

H.  B.  103  (Shnrtleff),  relief  John  Brown 2,500.00 

H.  B.  116  (Weber),  relief  Henry  Ben1:- 1,500.00 

120 


H.  B.  225   (Le  Pago),  relief  wife  of  Judge  Vickers 3,611.10 

H.  B.  248   (Schubert),  relief  Win.  Voris 3,500.00 

H.  B.  344  (McCabe),  relief  Dorothea  Schaefer 5,000.00 

H.  B.  359   (Tompkins),  relief  Lewis  Taylor 8,000.00 

H.  B.  392   (Scanlan),  relief  of  sixteen  persons 30,500.00 

H.  B.  393   (Scanlan),  relief  for  death  of  three  persons  9,500.00 

H.  B.  398  (Wood),  relief  Nathan  E.  Gray 2,000.00 

H.  B.  461   (Trandel),  relief  Peter  Schwaba   1,000.00 

H.  B.  514  (Foster),"  relief  Henry  Allen 250.00 

H.  B.   (554)    (Scholes),  relief  Henry  Allen 5,000.00 

H.  B.  558  (Brinkman),  relief  Chas.  Ailing 5,000.00 

H.  B.  647  (Curran),  relief  Bertha  Stilly 500.00 

H.  B.  648  (Curran) ,  relief  Sadie  Jasper 7,500.00 

H.  B.  907  (Tompkins),  relief  Jergensen 7,500.00 

H.  B.  975,  relief  of  John  Mana 500.00 

S.  B.  495,  relief  of  Vredenburg  et  al 25,704.29 


$122,865.39 


121 


A  MATTER  OF  $10,000 

This  chapter  cannot  be  made  plain  unless  the  reader 
has  an  accurate  knowledge  of  how  money  is  taken  out 
of  the  treasury  of  the  State.  There  must  be  what  is 
known  as  an  appropriation  act.  Usually  there  is  a  pro- 
vision in  the  act  which  clearly  indicates  that  money  can 
only  be  paid  out  of  the  treasury  for  the  settlement  of 
bills  after  the  delivery  of  the  property  or  the  incurring 
of  the  expense. 

If  any  other  system  should  be  inaugurated,  the 
treasury  of  the  State  of  Illinois  would  have  money  in 
other  hands  than  those  of  its  State  Treasurer.  There- 
fore, a  man  who  travels  must  certify  to  his  expense  ac- 
count before  he  can  be  reimbursed.  There  is  no  lawful 
way  for  an  advance  to  be  given  out  of  the  State  funds. 

Lieut.-Gov.  Barratt  O'Hara  secured  the  rehabilita- 
tion of  what  is  known  as  the  White  Slave  Committee  by 
a  resolution  passed  on  June  14,  1915. 

The  resolution  indicated  the  committee  had  not  fin- 
ished its  previous  labors  and  therefore  it  was  authorized 
to  subpoena  witnesses,  employ  such  assistants  as  might 
.be  necessary  and  make  its  report  to  the  50th  General 
Assembly,  which  will  convene  in  January,  1917. 

Under  normal  circumstances,  this  committee  would 
start  to  operate  about  July  1,  1915,  and  would  proceed 
to  take  testimony  throughout  the  State  of  Illinois  for  a 
year  and  a  half.  From  time  to  time,  as  it  would  incur 
expenses,  vouchers  would  be  prepared  and  drawn  on  the 
State  Treasury  for  their  payment.  This  committee,  how- 
ever, could  not  draw  vouchers  on  the  treasury  unless 
there  was  a  separate  appropriation  of  money. 

While  the  committee  was  created  by  a  mere  resolu- 
tion of  the  Senate,  an  appropriation  act  would  have  to 
pass  both  House  and  Senate ;  therefore,  a  bill  was  intro- 
duced in  the  Senate  to  appropriate  $10,000  for  the  use  of 
this  committee. 

122 


The  House  members,  and  particularly  the  Speaker, 
were  very  much  opposed  to  a  further  continuance  of  this 
committee.  They  had  no  voice  in  its  creation  and  they  did 
not  propose  to  give  it  any  money  with  which  to  operate. 
So  it  happened  that  when  the  appropriation  act  reached 
the  House,  it  refused  to  pass  it.  The  appropriation  bill 
was  dead. 

The  bill  of  complaint  charges :  *  *  That  during  said  ses- 
sion it  became  apparent  that  said  appropriation  would  not 
receive  the  approval  of  the  House  of  Representatives, 
and,  thereupon,  a  trick  and  device  was  planned  and 
schemed  whereby  the  treasury  of  the  State  was  to  be  de- 
pleted of  the  sum  of  $10,000 ;  that  said  scheme  and  plan  so 
intended  to  be  carried  out  and  so  consummated  was  to 
secure  vouchers  in  the  names  of  certain  dummies  for  cer- 
tain pretended  services  rendered  to  the  State  of  Illinois 
and  said  vouchers  to  apparently  represent  the  expendi- 
ture of  money;  that  the  persons  so  selected  were  as  fol- 
lows: 

"Charles  F.  Trick, 

"Claiborne  S.  Close, 

"Ralph  Pope  and 

"F.  H.  O'Hara,  brother  of  said  Barratt  O'Hara. 

"That  in  furtherance  of  said  scheme  or  plot  and  to 
deceive  the  public,  the  said  vouchers  were  drawn  on  dif- 
ferent dates  and  for  different  and  odd  amounts  and  when 
drawn,  with  the  exception  of  one  voucher,  were  delivered 
to  one  person  who  secured  all  the  warrants  thereon ;  that, 
with  the  exception  of  the  warrant  issued  to  F.  H.  0  'Hara, 
the  said  warrants  were  not  issued  until  after  the  final 
adjournment  of  the  49th  General  Assembly;  that  there- 
after and  on,  to-wit,  June  30, 1915,  F.  H.  0  'Hara,  brother 
of  said  Barratt  O'Hara,  secured  from  the  Auditor  of  the 
State  of  Illinois  warrants,  said  warrants  being  in  serial 
number  as  follows:.  Warrants  Nos.  77886,  77887,  77888, 
77889,  77890,  77891,  77892  and  77893;  that  said  war- 
rants aforesaid  were  retained  by  said  F.  H.  0  'Hara  until 
July  9,  being  the  date  of  the  filing  of  certain  suits  by  the 
complainant  herein  in  the  Circuit  Court  of  Sangamon 
County,  alleging  a  number  of  illegalities  and  irregulari- 

123 


ties  in  the  appropriation  of  money;  that  thereupon,  on, 
to-wit,  July  9,  1915,  some  person,  whose  name  is  unknown 
to  your  orator,  in  the  afternoon  thereof  presented  said 
warrants  to  the  Treasurer  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  and 
the  same  were  thereupon  cashed  and  paid  in  currency; 
that  previous  thereto,  the  said  F.  H.  O'Hara  had  se- 
cured a  warrant  and  had  cashed  the  same,  said  warrant 
hearing  the  number  73626. 

"Your  OBATOE  FURTHER  REPRESENTS  AND 
CHARGES  that  the  said  vouchers  upon  which  the  war- 
rants were  based,  issued  and  paid  are  rrow  on  file  with 
the  Auditor  of  Public  Accounts  and  are  as  follows,  to-wit : 

Voucher  No.  73626— Springfield,  111.,  June  18,  1915. 
State  of  Illinois  to  F.  H.  O'Hara,  Dr. 

"For  salaries,  reports,  and  other  expenses  in  connection 
with  the  Investigating  Committee,  appointed  under 
Senate  Resolution  No.  25,  of  the  48th  General 
Assembly,  and  continued  under  Senate  Resolution 
No.  64  of  the  49th  General  Assembly $5,500.00 

Approved:    Barratt  O'Hara,  Chairman  of  the  Com. 

Approved:  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov.  and  Pres.  of 
the  Senate. 

Payable  from  the  fund  for  committee  expenses  for  the 
49th  General  Assembly,  as  provided  for  in  Senate 
Resolution  No.  64.  The  back  of  the  voucher  bears 
the  number  of  the  warrant,  73626;  the  amount, 
$5,500,  in  pencil,  and  an  imprint  of  a  stamp  read- 
ing: Filed  in  office  of  Auditor  of  P.  A.,  June  18, 
1915.  James  J.  Brady,  Auditor,  P.  A. 

Voucher  No.  77886— June  15,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  C.  F.  Trick. 
Services  during  March,  1915,  as  correspondent  and  law 

clerk  for  committee $    300.00 

Expenses  incurred  in  performance  of  above  duties ....        73.95 


Total   $    373.95 

Approved:    Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov.   . 

Voucher  No.  77887— June  22,  1915. 

State  of  Illinois  to  C.  F.  Trick. 
For  services  during  February,  1915,  as  correspondent 

and  law  clerk  of  committee $    300.00 

Expenses  incurred  in  the  performance  of  above  duties. .         96.25 

124 


Stenographic  services  contracted  for  committee  meet- 
ings in  compiling  minutes  and  information  in  work- 
ing out  reports 600.00 


Total $    996.25 

Approved:     Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77888— Springfield,  June  29,  1915. 
State  of  Illinois  to  C.  S.  Close. 

Expenses  contracted  for  in  the  holding  of  committee 
meetings  for  traveling,  hotel,  telephone,  messenger 
and  other  necessary  expenditures  of  members  of  the 
committee  in  the  performance  of  their  duties,  under 

Senate  Eesolution  No.  64 $    962.70 

Approved:    Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77889— Springfield,  June  29,  1915. 
State  of  Illinois  to  Ralph  Pope. 

For  services  contracted  for  and  expenses  for  investi- 
gators for  committee  (three  months)  $  641.60 

Approved :    Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No,  77890— Springfield,  June  22,  1915. 
State  of  Illinois  to  C.  F.  Trick. 
For  stenographic  services  contracted  for  in  compilation 

of  law  and  preparation  of  reports  for  committee. .  .$    454.00 
Approved:   Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77891— Springfield,  June  15,  1915. 
State  of  Illinois  to  Ralph  Pope. 
For  services  contracted  for  investigators,  and  expenses 

for  Committee  under  Senate  Resolution  No.  64 $    325.00 

Approved:   Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77892— Springfield,  June  25,  1915. 
State  of  Illinois  to  C.  F.  Trick. 
For  services  during  January,  1915,  as  correspondent 

and  law  clerk  for  committee $    300.00 

Expenses  incurred  in  the  performance  of  above  duty. .        71.50 


Total   $    371.50 

Approved :  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  77893— Springfield,  June  22,  1915. 
State  of  Illinois  to  Ralph  Pop^e. 
For  services  contracted  for  investigators  and  expenses 

for  Committee  under  Senate  Resolution  64 $    375.00 

Approved :    Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov." 

125 


A  tabulation  of  the  foregoing  warrants  is  as  follows : 

Voucher  No.  73626,  F.  H.  O'Hara $  5,500.00 

Voucher  No.  77886,  C.  F.  Trick 373.95 

Voucher  No.  77887,  C.  F.  Trick 996.25 

Voucher  No.  77888,  C.  S.  Close 962.70 

Voucher  No.  77889,  Ealph  Pope • 641.60 

Voucher  No.  77890,  C.  F.  Trick 454.00 

Voucher  No.  77891,  Ealph  Pope  325.00 

Voucher  No.  77892,  C.  F.  Trick 371.50 

Voucher  No.  77893,  Ralph  Pope 375.00 


$10,000.00 

Mrs.  Ralph.  Pope  was  called  to  the  witness  stand  and 
since  her  testimony  is  short  it  is  reproduced  in  full,  and 
is  as  follows: 

MES.  EALPH  POPE, 

a  witness  of  lawful  age,  produced  as  a  witness  on  behalf 
of  the  complainant  herein,  being  by  me  first  duty  sworn  to 
testify  the  truth,  the  whole  truth  and  nothing  but  the 
truth,  deposeth  and  saith  as  follows: 

DIEECT  EXAMINATION  BY  ME.  MUNEO 

Q.  1.    What  is  your  name  ?    A.    Mrs.  Ealph  Pope. 

Q.  2.  Is  Ealph  Pope,  your  husband,  living ?  A.  No, 
sir. 

Q.  3.    When  did  he  die?    A.    July  31, 1915. 

Q.  4.  The  31st  of  July,  1915?  A.  Of  July ;  yes,  sir, 
1915. 

Q.  5.  About  when  were  you  married  to  Ealph  Pope ! 
A.  April  30,  1913. 

Q.  6.  Have  you  any  child  or  children?  A.  Yes,  I 
have  one  boy. 

Q.  7.    What  is  his  name  ?    A.    Ealph  Pope,  Jr. 
•  Q.  8.    At  the  time  of  the  death  of  Ealph  Pope,  where 
were  you  living?    A.  At  No.  611  Lytle  street. 

Q.  9.    In  a  house  or  an  apartment  ?    A.    A  flat. 

Q.  10.  During  the  last  six  months  before  the  death 
of  Ealph  Pope,  what  was  the  nature  of  his  employment ; 
what  did  he  do  ?  Whom  did  he  work  for  f  A.  Well,  he 
used  to  work  for  the  Herald. 

Q.  11.    In  what  capacity?    Do  you  know  what  was 

126 


the  nature  of  his  work?  Delivering  papers  ?  A.  He  used 
to  work  on  the  wagon;  yes,  I  guess  he  was  delivering 
papers. 

Q.  12.  How  long  was  he  sick  before  his  death?  A. 
Well,  he  took  sick  July  26th. 

Q.  13.  And  went  to  the  hospital  then,  did  he?  A. 
He  went  to  the  hospital  July  27th. 

Q.  14.    And  died?    A.    Died  July  31st. 

Q.  15.  During  the  month  of  July,  1915,  was  Balph 
Pope  at  home  in  the  City  of  Chicago  during  the  entire 
month?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  16.  That  is,  he  did  not  leave  Chicago  during  that 
entire  month?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  17.  Now,  were  you  familiar  with  his  money  af- 
fairs, his  financial  affairs?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  18.  So  far  as  you  know,  did  he  receive  any 
money  during  the  month  of  July,  1915  ?  A.  No,  sir ;  not 
that  I  know  of. 

Q.  19.  I  mean  any  large  sum  of  money?  A.  No, 
sir. 

Q.  20.  How  much  did  he  get  from  his  work  for  the 
paper  ?  A.  He  used  to  get  $19  a  week. 

Q.  21.    $19  a  week  A.   Yes,  sir. 

Q.  22.  What  was  his  financial  condition  during  that 
month?  A.  Very  poor. 

Q.  23.  Just  what  do  you  mean  by  "very  poor?" 
A.  Well,  he  did  not  have  no  money,  because  if  he  did  I 
would  have  had  it  to  pay  off  my  rent,  and  all  that. 

Q.  24.    You  were  back  in  your  rent  ?    A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  25.  Upon  his  death,  did  you  have  any  money  to 
bury  him  ?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  26.  Are  the  funeral  expenses  paid  yet?  A.  Well, 
they  paid  them  because  there  was  230  people  at  the 
funeral,  and  you  know  all  them  people,  everybody  gave 
about  $2,  you  know,  for  their  fare  and  all  that,  and  we 
paid. 

Q.  27.  You  paid  the  funeral  expenses  that  way? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  28.  Of  what  nationality  was  Ealph  Pope?  A. 
Italian. 

127 


Q.  29.  What  was  your  name  before  you  were  mar- 
ried? A.  Louisa  Deljudice. 

Q.  30.  Sometimes  called  Louisa  Delgeorge?  A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  31.  According  to  Complainant's  Exhibits  4,  5 
and  6,  which  are  presented  here  to  you,  Ealph  Pope  re- 
ceived from  the  State  of  Illinois  on  July  9,  1915,  the  sum 
of  $1,340.  Do  you  know  whether  he  received  that  money 
or  not  1  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  32.    Well,  did  he  receive  it  or  not?    A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  33.  Look  at  the  signature  appearing  on  the  back 
of  Complainant 's  Exhibits  4,  5  and  6  and  say  if  that  is  the 
signature  of  Ealph  Pope,  according  to  your  opinion.  A. 
Well,  I  could  not  say.  Of  course,  his  handwriting  was 
very  poor. 

Q.  34.  Look  at  the  document  which  I  now  present  to 
you,  and  I  will  ask  you  if  that  is  the  signature  of  Ealph 
Pope  on  that  document,  or  rather  if  that  is  the  handwrit- 
ing of  Ealph  Pope  that  appears  on  this  document  here? 
(Eef erring  to  paper  hereafter  marked  and  identified  as 
Complainant's  Exhibit  7.)  Is  this  his  handwriting?  A. 
Yes,  sir ;  yes,  sir. 

Q.  35.     That  is  his  handwriting?    A.    Yes,  sir. 

ME.  MUNEO :  I  now  wish  to  offer  in  evidence,  to  be 
marked  Complainant's  Exhibit  7,  a  sample  of  the  authen- 
ticated handwriting  of  Ealph  Pope. 

THE  MASTEE.    Eeceived  in  evidence. 

(Said  document  is  marked  Complainant's  Exhibit  7.) 

ME.  MUNEO.  Q.  36.  Did  you,  after  the  death  of 
Ealph  Pope,  ever  call  on  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieutenant- 
Governor  of  the  State  of  Illinois?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  37.  What  was  the  purpose  of  your  call  upon  him  ? 
A.  Because  I  heard  it  in  the  papers  that  Ealph  had  some 
money  coming  from  Springfield. 

Q.  38.  What  did  Mr.  O'Hara  say  to  you  ; at  that 
time?  A.  Why,  I  went  up  there  and  I  says,  "Mr. 
O'Hara,"  I  says,  "there  is  things — I  hear  things  in  the 
newspapers  about  Ealph  having  money  from  the  State. 
He  says,  'No,  Mrs.  Pope,  that  is  a  lie.  You  cannot  be- 
lieve the  newspapers.  But,'  he  says,  'if  Ralph  was  liv- 

128 


ing,'  he  says,  'it  would  have  been  a  different  thing.  But, 
seeing  that  Ealph  was  dead, '  ' ' — he  just  nodded  his  head. 

Q.  39.  Did  you  tell  him  your  financial  condition? 
A.  Yes,  sir,  and  he  says,  "Well,  seeing  that  you  are  a 
widow  of  a  friend  of  mine,"  he  says,  "I  will  try  to  help 
you." 

Q.  40.     Did  he  help  you?    A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  41.  Has  he  ever  paid  you  any  money?'  A.  They 
made  a  collection  down  town,  and  they  say  that  he  put 
$25  in  it. 

Q.  42.    Who  said  he  did?    A.    The  boys. 

Q.  43.  How  much  was  the  collection?  A.  I  can- 
not just  remember  now,  because  there  was  two  or  three 
collections  from  the  boys. 

Q.  44.  Have  you  ever  seen  Mr.  O'Hara  since  then? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  45.  Has  he  ever  communicated  with  you  by  let- 
ter or  otherwise?  A.  No,  sir.  He  says  he  was.  He 
took  my  address  and  all  that,'  that  he  was  going  to  write 
to  me. 

Q.  46.  He  said  he  would  write  to  you?  A.  Yes, 
sir;  but  he  dever  did. 

Q.  47.  What  are  you  doing  now  to  support  your- 
self and  your  child.  A.  Working  in  a  tailor  shop. 

Q.  48.  How  old  are  you?  A.  I  will  be  22  next 
month. 

Q.  49.  What  is  your  condition  as  to  your  health? 
Are  you  strong?  A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  50.  Well,  you  say  you  are  not  strong;  what  do 
you  mean  by  that?  A.  Well,  I  always  have  a  pain  on 
my  chest,  and  I  had  a  pain  on  my  side  and  the  doctor 
says  that  I  was  supposed  to  be  operated  on  if  that  did  not 
go ;  appendicitis. 

Q.  51.  You  were  supposed  to  be  operated  on?  A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  52.  Where  are  you  living  nowf\  A.  At  No.  619 
South  Sangamon  street. 

Q.  53.    At  whose  house?    A.    My  mother's. 

Q.  54.  Did  you  ever  know  of  your  husband  doing 
any  work  for  the  State?  A.  No,  sir. 

129 


Q.  55.  How  old  was  your  husband  when  he  died? 
A.  He  was  28  years  old. 

Q.  56.  Mrs.  Pope,  during  the  year  1915,  that  is  this 
year —  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  56  (continued)  — did  Mr.  Kalph  Pope,  your  hus- 
band, leave  the  City  of  Chicago?  A.  No,  sir. 

Whereupon  the  further  hearing  of  said  cause  was 
adjourned  until  Saturday,  November  27,  1915,  at  10 
o'clock  a.  m. 

Miss  Vera  C.  Grote  testified  she  was  the  cashier  of 
the  Chicago  Herald ;  that  she  knew  Ealph  Pope  well  and 
that  he  worked  in  the  capacity  of  handling  the  bulldog 
edition  in  the  downtown  district;  that  he  was  a  driver 
who  delivered  papers  to  the  newsboys  on  the  streets  of 
Chicago.  He  worker  for  the  Herald  in  December,  1914, 
and  January  and  February,  1915,  and  was  back  again 
in  May,  June  and  July.  He  was  there  until  he  took  sick 
about  July  25.  Miss  Grote  testified  she  had  seen  him 
write  his  name, many  times  and  that  the  receipts  which 
she  presented  bore  his  signature. 

CHARLES  F.  TRICK, 

a  witness  of  lawful  age,  produced  as  a  witness  on  behalf 
of  the  plaintiff,  being  by  me  first  duly  sworn  to  testify 
the  truth,  the  whole  truth  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  de- 
poseth  and  saith  as  follows: 

DIRECT  EXAMINATION  BY  MR.  MUNRO 

Q.    What  is  your  name?    A.    Charles  F.  Trick. 

Q.    You  reside  in  the  City  of  Chicago  f    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  position,  if  any,  do  you  hold  at  the  present 
time  or  for  whom  are  you  working?  A.  I  am  not  em- 
ployed at  the  present  time. 

Q.  Were  you  working  any  place  during  the  month  of 
January,  1915?  A.  Holding  any  position  ? 

Q.    Yes.    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  position?  A.  Advertising  manager  for 
the  Rex  Typewriter  Company. 

Q.  How  long  did  you  retain  that  position.  A.  Til] 
approximately  the  1st  of  May. 

180 


Q.  Receiving  about  how  much  a  week?  A.  $40  a 
week. 

Q.  What  were  your  duties  there,  Mr.  Trick!  A.  I 
said  advertising  manager. 

Q.    Yes?    What  were  your  office  hours  there,  about? 

A.  Our  hours  were  not  regular.  I  was  not  confined 
to  the  office. 

Q.  You  were  there  practically  every  day,  however, 
during  that  period?  A.  Yes,  sir,  almost  every  day  dur- 
ing the  period. 

Q.  Did  you  do  any  other  work  during  that  same 
period?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  you  do?  A.  I  served  the  Vice  Com- 
mission of  the  Illinois  Senate. 

Q.  Who  employed  you,  Mr.  Trick?  A.  The  chair- 
man of  the  commission,  Barratt  O'Hara. 

Q.  When  did  he  employ  you?  A.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  my  services  for  the  commission  extended  from  al- 
most the  1st  of  September  the  previous  fall. 

Q.     1914?    A.    Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  work  regularly  for  the  committee?  A. 
Almost  regularly;  yes,  sir. 

Q.  During  the  year  1914?  A.  No,  not  during  the 
whole  year,  but  beginning  about  the  1st  of  September. 

Q.     That  was  your  regular  work?    A.    Yes. 

Q.  During  that  same  time  you  were  also  employed 
by  the  Bloombeck  people,  were  you  not?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  was  your  position  with  the  Bloombeck 
people  ?  A.  Advertising  writer. 

Q.  What  was  the  nature  of  the  work  that  you  did 
for  the  vice  committee  in  1914?  A.  My  duties  were  de- 
scribed as  those  of  correspondent  and  law  clerk. 

Q.  What  were  they  ?  A.  The  handling  of  the  cor- 
respondence ancf  the  dictating  of  letters. 

Q.  Where  did  you  do  that — at  the  office?  A.  At 
the  office;  at  the  office  of  the  Commission,  or  rather  at 
Mr.  O'Hara 's  own  office. 

Q.  Where  was  that  office  located?  A.  Last  year 
at  29  South  La  Salle  street. 

Q.    Where  was  it  located  this  year?    A.    From  the 

131       } 


1st  of  May  in  the  Tower  Building ;  I  think  about  the  1st  of 
May. 

Q.  Between  the  1st  of  January  and  the  1st  of  May 
where  was  the  office  located?  A.  29  South  La  Salle. 

Q.  Well,  were  you  carrying  on  the  work  for  the  Vice 
Commission  at  the  same  time  you  were  working  for  the 
Rex  Typewriter  Company?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  say  your  services  were  answering  corre- 
spondence ?  A.  Answering  correspondence. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  regular  stipulated  fee  fixed 
for  your  services!  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  much?  A.  Why,  my  compensation  was 
made  a  matter  of  concession,  you  might  say.  That  is  to 
say,  there  was  no  compensation  there  at  all ;  there  could 
not  be.  In  the  language  of  the  street,  I  gambled  my  time 
against  the  prospects  of  being  paid. 

Q.  How  much  did  you  gamble  your  time  for  ?  A.  It 
was  understood  I  was  to  get  the  equivalent  of  $5  a,  day  for 
the  entire  period  of  service. 

Q.  You  did  not  pay  the  office  rent,  did  you?  A. 
Office  rent? 

Q.    Yes.    A.    I  did  for  a  time ;  yes. 

Q.  For  what  time?  A.  I  have  not  got  the  exact 
date  in  my  mind,  whether  it  was  one  month  or  two 
months. 

Q.     How  much  was  that?    A.    $50.00 

Q.  That  was  at  29  South  La  Salle?  A.  29  South  La 
Salle. 

Q.  You  paid  that  out  of  your  own  money?  A.  I 
advanced  it,  yes. 

Q.  What  other  expenses  did  you  pay?  A.  I  have 
not  any  list  of  them. 

Q.  Well,  about  how  much?  A.  al  could  not  ap- 
proximate the  sum.  All  of  my  expenses  have  been  item- 
ized, and,  of  course,  are  a  part  of  the  records  of  the  Com- 
mission, and  I  have  not  access  to  them  now. 

Q.  When  did  you  make  that  itemization?  A.  As 
the  expenditures  were  made. 

Q.  Did  you  go  over  during  the  day  and  work  in  the 
day  time  at  that  office?  A.  I  dropped  in  there  almost  every 

132 


day,  yes,  sir ;  sometimes  for  an  hour,  sometimes  a  couple 
of  hours,  and  sometimes  a  little  longer,  and  always  in  the 
evening. 

Q.  You  gave  your  entire  time  to  the  Eex  Typewriter 
Company,  did  you?  A.  Not  the  entire  day.  I  say  I  ap- 
propriated a  couple  of  hours  almost  every  day. 

Q.     Out  of  their  time ?    A.    Out  of  their  time. 

Q.  Were  you  not  supposed  to  give  them  your  entire 
time,  over  there!  A.  Well,  the  duties  could  not  consume 
my  entire  time.  The  conditions  would  involve  some  ex- 
planation. I  might  make  the  explanation  if  it  is  desired. 

Q.  What  is  that?  A.  I  went  into  the  employ  of  the 
Eex  Typewriter  Company  with  the  understanding  that 
my  time  would  be  fully  employed,  as  a  plan  was  laid 
out  for  a  large  advertising  campaign,  but  the  company's 
financial  circumstances  did  not  permit  me  to  proceed  with 
the  campaign,  so  that  the  work  I  had  laid  out  I  was  not 
able  to  proceed  with,  and  they  finally  gave  up  their  plan 
from  a  lack  of  ability  to  finance  it. 

Q.  Did  you  present  bills  to  be  paid  for  your  services 
for  the  month  of  January,  February  and  March?  A.  I 
did. 

Q.     Separate  bills  for  each  one?    A.  •  Yes. 

Q.    You  received  vouchers  for  tliose,  did  you?    I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  present  those  all  at  one  time,  or  at  dif- 
ferent periods?  A.  All  at  one  time. 

Q.  Did  you  receive  your  vouchers  all  at  one  time? 
A.  I  did. 

Q.  What  day  did  you  receive  your  vouchers  !  A.  I 
could  not  answer  that. 

Q.     You  don't  know  at  all?    A.    No. 

Q.  Where  were  you  when  you  got  your  vouchers? 
A.  At  Springfield. 

Q.  Were  you  in  Springfield  during  the  recess  be- 
tween the  19th  of  June  and  the  30th  of  June  ?  A.  I  can- 
not say  whether  I  was  or  not. 

Q.  Were  you  in  Springfield  on  June  30?  A.  Yes. 
Hold  on!  I  was  not  in  Springfield  then. 

Q.    When  your  vouchers  were  paid,  June  15,  did 

133 


you  get  the  vouchers  separately!     A.     I  could  not  say. 
Do  you  mean  vouchers  in  payment  of  those  bills ? 

Q.    Yes.    A.    No,  I  got  all  the  vouchers  at  one  time. 

Q.  Did  you  note  that  the  vouchers  were  of  different 
numbers?  A.  I  don't  think  so. 

Q.  Did  you  notice  they  were  different  dates?  A. 
No. 

Q.  You  say  you  handed  in  an  itemized  statement  of 
what  these  vouchers  were  for?  A.  Yes.  Handed  in! 
Handed  in  to  whom? 

Q.  I  am  asking  you.  A.  I  rendered  an  itemized 
account. 

Q.  Whom  "did  you  render  it  to  ?  A.  The  chairman 
of  the  Commission. 

Q.    Mr.  Barratt  O'Hara?    A.    Yes. 

Q.  I  note  that  one  of  your  vouchers,  No.  77887,  is 
apparently  issued  on  June  22,  1915,  "State  of  Illinois,  C. 
F.  Trick,  for  services  during  the  month  of  February,  1915, 
as  correspondent  and  law  clerk,  $300."  Is  that  correct? 
A.  That  is  correct. 

Q.  What  was  that  based  upon,  what  rate'?  $10  a 
day?  A.  $10  a  day. 

Q.    Including  Sundays?    A.    Including  Sundays. 

Q.  Then  you  have  l '  Expenses  in  the  performance  .of 
said  duties,  $96.25. ' '  Did  you  issue  an  itemized  statement 
for  that?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  then  you  had  "  Stenographic  services  con- 
tracted for  the  committee  meetings,  compiling  minutes 
and  information,  and  working  on  report,  $600. ' '  Did  you 
spend  that  money?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Out  of  your  own  funds?  A.  Money  I  had  se- 
cured, borrowed. 

Q.    Whom  did  you  borrow  it  from? 

MB.  MACEY.  (It  was  not  disclosed  to  the  reporter 
on  whose  behalf  or  in  what  capacity  Mr.  Macey  ap- 
peared.) I  do  not  know,  Mr.  Munro — I  object  to  his  pri- 
vate affairs.  I  hardly  think  that  is  proper. 

MB.  MUNBO.  If  he  does  not  want  to  answer,  he  need 
not  answer.  Now,  that  money  was  spent  by  you,  and  you 

134 


desire  to  have  it  returned  to  you.     Is  that  correct?    A. 
I  do. 

Q.  Now  take  voucher  of  June  15th,  Voucher  No. 
77886,  "Services  during  March,  1915,  as  correspondent 
and  law  clerk  for  the  committee,  $300."  That  is  based 
on  the  same  rate  of  $10  a  day?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  then,  "Expense  incurred,  $73.95."  That 
money  was  spent  by  you?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  take  Voucher  No.  77890,  for '  *  Stenographic 
services,  contracted  for  in  the  compilation  of  law  and  re- 
ports for  committee,  $454."  That  money  was  spent  by 
you?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  it  was  spent  for?  A.  Yes,' 
sir. 

Q.  What  was  it  spent  for?  A.  It  wa*s  all  a  part 
of  the  records.  I  could  not  detail  it.  I  could  not  dis- 
tinguish between  work  paid  for  by  one  voucher  and  work 
paid  for  by  the  other,  except  with  reference  to  the  item- 
ized voucher.  They  are  not  my  records  any  longer. 

Q.  You  have  Voucher  No.  77892,  * '  Charles  F.  Trick, 
services  during  January,  1915,  as  correspondent  and  law 
clerk  for  committee,  $300."  That  is  on  the  same  basis? 
A.  The  same  basis. 

Q.  "Expense  incurred  in  performance  of  above 
duties,  $71.50. ' '  That  money  was  spent  by  you  ?  A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  And  spent  by  you  in  connection  with  this  work? 
A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  All  told,  you  advanced  then  to  the  committee 
$1,199.54?  A.  I  advanced  whatever  the  sum  total  of 
those  various  vouchers  is. 

Q.  And  you  advanced  it  with  the  idea  that  you  did 
not  know  whether  you  would  get  it  back  or  not?  A.  No. 
I  felt  pretty  confident  I  would  get  it  back.  Of  course,  I 
had  no  positive  knowledge.  I  had  very  good  assurance 
that  I  could  rely  upon. 

Q.  Well,  in  any  event  you  advanced  the  money?  A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Now,  take  it  during  the  month  of  January,  was 

135 


that  part  of  that  $71.50  for  rent,  did  you  say?  A.  I 
could  not  say. 

Q.  You  borrowed  occasionally  a  little  money  from 
Mr.  Herbert,  who  employed  you,  did  you?  A.  I  did  not. 

ME.  MACEY.  Let's  not  get  into  those  personal  af- 
fairs. 

ME.  MUNEO:  I  don't  mean  to  go  beyond  that.  I 
just  wanted  to  see  where  the  witness  could  get  this  large 
sum  of  money.  Mr.  Trick,  these  vouchers  were  all  de- 
livered to  you,  you  say,  on  June  30th?  A.  Those  that 
you  have  read?  Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Now,  did  you  get  your  warrants?    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  cash  them?  A.  I  believe  I  cashed  all 
of  them. 

Q.  Who  delivered  the  warrants  to  you?  Did  you 
get  them  from  the  Auditor's  office?  A.  Some  one  in 
the  office. 

Q.     Delivered  to  you  personally!    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  anybody  else  present  there,  that  you  remem- 
ber, at  that  time?  A.  No. 

Q.  When  you  cashed  your  warrants  at  the  Treas- 
urer's office — what  day  did  you  cash  your  warrants  at  the 
Treasurer's  office.  A.  I  could  not  answer  that  definitely. 

Q.  You  held  them  in  your  possession  some  time, 
did  you?  A.  I  cannot  answer  as  to  that  definitely,  either. 

Q.     You  don't  remember?    A.    No. 

Q.  Well,  you  needed  that  money  back,  that  you  had 
spent,  didn't  you,  pretty  bad?  A.  Well,  it  was  coming. 
It  was  just  as  good  in  a  warrant  as  it  was  in  a  voucher. 

Q.     But  you  were  not  particularly  anxious  to  cash  it? 

A.  I  do  not  know  what  may  have  intervened  or  in- 
terfered with  or  delayed  me.  As  I  said,  the  certified  check 
is  just  as  good  as  currency. 

Q.     Do  you  keep  a  bank  account?    A.    No,  I  don't. 

Q.  Did  you  have  one  in  the  month  of  July,  1915? 
A.  I  don't  recall  whether  I  did  or  not. 

Q.  You  did  not  deposit  those  warrants  in  the  bank 
then?  A.  No. 

Q.    You  kept  them  in  your  possession  until  the  day 

136 


they  show  they  were  paid?    A.    I  do  not  know,  although 
they  show  they  are  paid;  but  in  any  event  I  got  them. 

Q.     When  warrants  are  paid,  you  understand,  it  is 
stamped  on  them,  on  to  the  face,  "Paid?" 
ME.  MACEY:    If  you  know. 
A.     I  do  not  know. 

MR.  MUNEO :  Q.  They  did  not  go  out  of  your  pos- 
session until  they  were  paid,  from  the  time  that  you  got 
them?  A.  I  cannot  say  as  to  that.  There  was  no  reason 
why  they  should.  It  may  have  happened. 

Q.  I  note  that  you  were  put  on  the  committee — you 
were  elected  as  secretary,  or  assistant  to  the  law  clerk  of 
the  49th  General  Assembly.  Is  that  correct?  A.  Ap- 
pointed by  resolution.  I  don't  know  whether  you  call  that 
election  or  not. 

Q.  You  were  appointed  to  that  position?  A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  Did  you  take  on  the  duties  of  that  position?  A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  day  did  you  take  on  the  duties'?  A.  Some 
time  in  April.  I  cannot  recall  the  date. 

Q.  Did  you  go  to  Springfield  in  April?  A.  No,  I 
don't  think  I  did.  I  went  down  there  late  in  April  or 
early  in  May. 

Q.  The  resolution,  I  have.it  right  here,  appoints  you 
and  your  salary  to  begin  as  of  April  5th  at  $6  a  day.  The 
resolution  was  passed  on  May  26th.  Did  you  receive  that 
$300  for  those  fifty  days?  A.  I  believe  I  did. 

Q.  Did  you  perform  any  services  as  chief  clerk  to 
the  law  secretary  from  April  5th  to  May  1st?  A.  I  am 
not  prepared  to  answer  that. 

Q.  Well,  do  I  understand  that  you  refuse  to  answer 
it  ?  A.  You  can  have  it  that  way. 

Q.  Did  you  see  any  warrants  at  the  time  you  got 
your  warrants  payable  to  Mr.  Close  and  Mr.  Ralph  Pope? 
A.  No,  sir. 

Q.     After  the  30th  of  July,  the  final  adjournment,  did 
you  come  immediately  to  Chicago?.   A.    Did  I  what? 
Q.    Come  to  Chicago? 

137 


MR.  MAGEY:  Correct  the  record  there.  You  say 
the  30th  of  July. 

ME.  MUNEO :  Thank  you.  Did  you  leave  and  come 
to  Chicago  immediately?  A.  I  believe  I  did. 

Q.  What  day  did  you  leave  there?  A.  I  don't  re- 
member that. 

Q.  Mr.  Trick,  who  else  was  in  the  office  at  29  South 
La  Salle  street  during  January,  February  and  March, 
when  you  ran  that  office  ?  A.  I  had  some  stenographers 
there. 

Q.  Who?  A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  give  their 
names.  I  had  them  off  and  on,  sometimes  for  a  short 
period,  and  sometimes  for  a  long  one. 

Q.  Did  you  have  the  stenographers  working  regu- 
larly? Did  you  have  any  regular  one?  A.  Yes. 

Q.  Who?  A.  Not  regularly,  as  I  say.  I  would 
hire  them  by  the  week  or  two  weeks. 

Q.  Can  you  give  their  first  names?  A.  I  do  not — 
I  did  not  know  them  by  their  first  names.  I  knew  them 
by  their  last  names. 

Q.  What  were  those  names?  A.  One  was  named 
Wilson. 

Q.    What  was  the  first  name?    A.    I  don't  know. 

Q.  Was  anybody  else  in  the  office?  A.  As  I  say, 
sometimes  I  had  four  or  five. 

Q.    Anybody  else  except  stenographers?    A.    No. 

Q.  Did  you  take  receipts  for  the  money  that  you 
gave  to  these  stenographers  ?  A.  No. 

Q.  Then  your  expense  accounts  that  you  handed  in 
are  not  based  upon  anything  except  the  statement  of  your 
own  expenses  that  you  paid  ?  A.  No. 

Q.    Did  you  pay  them  by  check?    A.  '  No. 

Q.  In  the  purchase  of  supplies,  did  you  take  receipts 
for  any  purchase  of  supplies  ?  A.  I  did  to  some  extent. 
I  don't  believe  I  did  invariably. 

Q.  Did  you  give  the  receipts  for  those  supplies- 
hand  those  in  with  your  vouchers?  A.  Such  as  I  had, 
yes,  sir. 

Q.  Could  you  produce  a  complete  list  of  your  ex- 

138 


penses,  amounting  to  $1,199.45?  A.  By  courtesy  of  the 
committee,  which  has  the  only  record  that  is  made. 

MR.  MACEY :  Q.  Are  those  receipts  and  vouchers 
in  your  possession?  A.  Not  in  my  possession,  no. 

Q.  Have  you  any  control  over  them?  A.  Not  at 
the  present  time.  I  may  say  I  never  considered  that  I 
had  any  control  over  any  records  of  the  Commission. 

MR.  MUNRO:  Q.  I  note  that  in  addition  to  the 
amounts  which  I  mentioned  here  you  were  paid  the  sum 
of  $92.20  for  traveling  expenses.  Were  those  incurred 
after  you  went  to  Springfield?  A.  I  cannot  recall  now. 
I  had  incurred  some  traveling  expenses  after  I  went  to 
Springfield,  but  the  amount  and  the  occasions  I  could  not 
recall.  Q.  I  note  that  you  got  $200  for  clerical  services. 
Did  you  perform  any  additional  services  at  Springfield 
after  you  went  there?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  was  the  nature  of  them?  A.  Services  to 
the  Appropriations  Committee. 

Q.  That  would  be  during  the  month  of  May  and  up 
to  June  19th,  would  it?  A.  I  think  it  was  about  that, 
probably. 

Q.  What  was  the  nature  of  those  extra  services  ?  A. 
Law  clerk,  secretarial  work  for  that  Commission,  that 
committee. 

Q.  Well,  your  regular  pay  during  that  same  period 
would  amount  to  approximately  $50?  A.  My  regular 
pay? 

Q.    Yes,  at  $6  a  day.    A.    In  the  law  clerk's  office? 

Q.    Yes.    A.    Yes. 

Q.  Then  you  got  in  addition  to  that,  from  this  one 
committee,  you  got  $200,  did  you  not?  A.  For  evening 
work ;  yes,  sir. 

Q.     For  evening  work  ?    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  you  hit  the  State  of  Illinois 
pretty  hard  for  six  months  ?  A.  I  will  answer  that  ques- 
tion if  you  wish.  Can  I  consult  Mr.  Macey  in  regard  to 
answering  that,  without  it  going  into  the  record? 

MR.  MACEY  (apparently  addressing  the  reporter) : 
Yes,  sure.  Keep  your  pen  quiet  there. 

139 


MB.  MUNEO :  Q.  Mr.  Trick,  I  notice  in  addition 
to  what  I  have  already  mentioned  to  you,  it  appears  that 
you  drew  the  sum  of  $636,  being  on  your  regular  salary  as 
clerk  and  law  clerk,  for  86  days  during  the  session,  and 
for  20  days  after  the  session.  Is  that  correct?  A.  The 
amount  I  cannot  verify.  I  received  twenty  days'  extra 
pay. 

Q.     Extra  pay?    A.    Yes. 

Q.  Was  that  a  gratuity,  or  was  that  for  extra 
services  ?  A.  I  do  not  know  whether  the  word  gratuity 
defines  it  or  not?  It  was  the  same  bonus  that  was  given 
to  a  large  number  of  others. 

Q.    It  was  a  bonus  ?    A.    It  might  be  called  a  bonus. 

Q.  That  was  in  addition  to  the  $200?  A.  What 
$200? 

Q.     That  you  got  for  committee  work?    A.    Yes. 

Q.  I  just  want  to  understand  this  thing.  You  got 
$200  additional  for  that  committee  work,  and  then  you  got 
twenty  days '  additional  pay,  and  you  got  your  fifty  days, 
commencing  from  April  5  down  to  the  date  of  the  reso- 
lution, which  was  May  26.  How  many  days  did  you  work 
in  May?  A.  I  cannot  say. 

Q.    What  is  that?    A.    I  cannot  state. 

Q.  About  what  day  did  you  go  down  there  to  go 
to  work?  A.  I  worked  every  day.  I  worked  from  what- 
ever day  that  was.  I  cannot  recall  the  exact  date. 

Q.  Are  you  holding  any  of  this  sum  of  money  which 
you  received  from  the  vouchers,  which  I  have  asked  you 
about — 

A.     Holding  it? 

Q.  I  will  finish  my  question — vouchers  which  I  have 
asked  about,  for  the  months  of  January,  February  and 
March,  amounting  all  told  to  $2,099.45? 

ME.  MACEY :  Now,  what  are  we  to  understand  by 
"holding  the  money?" 

ME.  MUNEO :  Well,  I  will  make  it  plain  to  him  if 
he  does  not  understand  it,  or  he  can  say  so.  Have  you 
the  sum  of  $2,099.45,  which  was  received  here  intact  ?  A. 
No. 

140 


Q.  Or  subject  to  the  control  of  anybody  else?  A. 
No. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  out  any  portion  of  this  money,  or 
all  of  it,  to  anybody  else?  A.  All  of  it. 

Q.  Whom  did  you  pay  it  to  ?  A.  The  party  from 
whom  I  borrowed  it. 

Q.  That  is,  the  whole  $2,099?  A.  Just  the  $2,099, 
including  the  salary? 

Q.  Yes.  A.  The  total  is  confusing.  The  salary,  of 
course,  went  totally  for  my  own  needs. 

Q.  You  appropriated  that  for  your  own  needs  ?  A. 
Of  course. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  want  to  say  from  whom  you  bor- 
rowed this  money?  A.  I  do  not. 

ME.  MUNEO :    That  will  do. 

ME.  MACEY :    Just  a  moment. 

ME.  MUNEO :  You  are  not  appearing  here  official- 
ly, are  you,  Mr.  Macey? 

ME.  MACEY :    There  is  just  one  thing  here— 

ME.  MUNEO:  I  do  not  know  that  there  is  any 
practice  of  any  man  appearing  for  a  witness.  You  can 
ask  me  the  questions  if  you  want. 

ME.  MACEY:  Can  I  ask  him  a  question  in  your 
name  1 

ME.  MUNEO:    In  my  name,  if  you  like. 

ME.  MACEY:  These  questions,  of  course,  are  sim- 
ply as  Munro  would  ask  them.  You  did  some  work  for 
the— 

ME.  MUNEO :  I  will  take  that  back.  I  don't  think 
you  had  better  put  those  words  in  my  mouth.  I  will  have 
to  object,  Mr.  Macey,  to  your  asking  these  questions, 
either.  If  there  is  anything  I  don't  make  clear,  I  would 
be  very  glad  to  have  you  suggest  it  to  me,  but  I  cannot 
consent  to  anybody  other  than  an  attorney  for  a  party 
to  the  action  examining  the  witness. 

ME.  MACEY:  Well,  who  are  the  parties  to  this 
action? 

141 


MR.  MUNEO:  James  J.  Brady,  Andrew  Russell 
and  Louis  G.  Stephenson. 

MR.  MACEY:  I  suppose  under  the  Fergus  Deci- 
sion that  the  only  person  who  could  represent  either  one 
of  the  gentlemen  you  mention  is  the  Attorney-General. 
But  as  I  understand,  any  witness  who  appears  before  the 
Committee — or  rather  I  should  say  before  the  commis- 
sioner— can  have  the  benefit  of  counsel  in  any  of  his 
matters  which  might  involve  a  question  of  his  good  faith. 
As  I  understand  it,  that  is  the  rule.  If  for  no  other 
ground,  I  might  appear  as  amicus  curice. 

MR.  MUNRO:  You  are  getting  pretty  far  afield 
now,  brother. 

MR.  MACEY :  There  are  some  questions  here  which 
you  have  asked  which  might  lead  to  a  conclusion  differ- 
ent than  that  to  which  the  further  facts  might  indicate. 
In  order  that  the  record  may  be  saved  in  the  matter,  I 
will  ask  the  question  over  your  objection,  and  then  you 
can  let  the  record  so  show. 

MR.  MUNRO :  Now,  Mr.  Macey,  you  are  too  good  a 
lawyer  not  to  know  that  that  is  not  the  proper  practice. 

MR.  MACEY:     I  submit  it  is  unusual. 

MR.  MUNRO :  And  if  this  man  wishes  to  come  back 
on  a  cross-motion,  he  can  come  into  court.  There  are  all 
sorts  of  ways.  The  Attorney-General  has  received  tele- 
graphic notice  in  both  cases  that  this  case  would  be  on 
for  hearing,  and  he  has  reserved  his  right  not  to  come 
here  and  not  to  cross'-examine.  Now,  for  you  to  come 
and  cross-examine  attacks  that  right,  and  there  is  noth- 
ing doing. 

MR.  MACEY:  Well,  I  would  like  to  have  you  ask 
this  question,  then,  Mr.  Munro. 

MR.  MUNRO:  "Was  all  of  the  work  which  Mr. 
Trick  performed  as  included  by  your  questions  during  the 
session  of  the  49th  General  Assembly  upon  the  proper 
authority  of  the  Senate  or  of  the  Committee,  or  proper 
Committee  of  the  Senate?"  That  would  be  a  legal  con- 
clusion. I  will  ask  him  who  employed  him. 

MR.  MACEY :    Ask  him  the  time,  then,  during  which 

142 


he  did  this  work,  if  it  was  between  the  convening  of  the 
Legislature  and  the  sine  die  adjournment. 

MR.  MUNRO :  That  would  be  a  matter  of  record, 
would  it  not? 

MR.  MACEY:  It  would  be  proper  for  him  to  an- 
swer the  question  if  he  knows. 

MR.  MUNRO :  I  will  ask  him  that  one  question,  if 
you  want,  if  you  wish  it,  and  that  will  be  satisfactory. 
Did  you  do  the  work  which  has  been  mentioned  to  you  in 
these  vouchers  here,  between  the  convening  and  the  sine 
die  adjournment  of  the  49th  General  Assembly?  A.  I 
believe  the  correct  answer  to  that  is  that  I  did  part  of 
it  between  those  dates. 

Q.  Well,  your  services  for  the  month  of  January  and 
the  month  of  March  and  the  month  of  February  were  in 
January,  February  and  March  of  1915,  were  they  not? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  So  that  so  far  as  the  services  are  concerned  that 
was  between  the  date  of  the  convening  and  the  adjourn- 
ment? A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  as  to  your  expenses  incurred,  were  those 
expenses  incurred  during  the  months  in  which  they  pur- 
port to  be  incurred  by  the  voucher  ?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

MR.  MUNRO :    Is  that  what  you  wanted? 

MR.  MACEY:  That  is  what  I  wanted,  simply  to 
show  that  this  work  was  done  during  the  session  and  not 
previous  or  subsequent  to  it. 

And  further  deponent  saith  not. 


Subscribed  and  sworn  to  before  me  this 
day  of ,  A.  D.  1915. 


TESTIMONY  OF  EDWARD  C.  CURTIS. 

EDWARD  C.  CURTIS, 

a  witness  of  lawful  age,  produced  as  a  witness  on  behalf 
of  the  plaintiff,  being  by  me  first  duly  sworn  to  testify 
the  truth,  the  whole  truth  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  de- 
poseth  and  saith  as  follows: 

143 


DIEECT  EXAMINATION  BY  MR.  MUNEO 

Q.     What  is  your  name?    A.     Edward  C.  Curtis. 

Q.     Where  do  you  reside?    A.    Grant  Park. 

Q.  What  official  position,  if  any,  do  you  hold  in  the 
State  of  Illinois'?  A.  State  Senator,  Twentieth  District. 

Q.  You  have  served  the  state  for  a  considerable  pe- 
riod of  time?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  what  capacity,  Senator?  A.  Well,  I  was  for 
a  time  in  the  House  of  Eepresentatives,  and  after  that  in 
the  Senate. 

Q.  You  were  once  Speaker  of  the  House  A.  Yes, 
sir. 

Q.  How  many  years  have  you  been  in  the  Senate 
now?  A.  Well,  it  is  twelve  years. 

Q.  During  the  last  session,  what  official  position  did 
you  hold  in  the  Senate  ?  A.  I  was  chairman  of  the  Ap- 
propriations Committee. 

Q.  And  that  was  a  very  strenuous  position,  I 
imagine?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  had  two  or  three  clerks,  I  believe,  that  you 
kept  busy  on  that  Committee  ?  A.  Yes,  sir ;  we  had  two 
clerks  that  were  busy. 

Q.     You  had  a  Committee  clerk,  a  budget  clerk?    A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  Charles  F.  Trick  do  any  extra  work  for  your 
Committee  as  budget  clerk?  A.  I  don't  think  so.  We 
had  a  budget  clerk  and  I  think  he  performed  all  that 
work.  That  name  is  not  familiar  to  me. 

Q.     You  did  not  know  him  ?    A.    No,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  BAEEATT  O'HAEA 
BAEEATT  O'HAEA, 

a  witness  of  lawful  age,  produced  as  a  witness  on  bel  alf 
of  the  plaintiff,  being  by  me  first  duly  sworn  to  testify 
the  truth,  the  whole  truth  and  nothing  but  the  truth,  de- 
poseth  and  saith  as  follows : 

DIEECT  EXAMINATION  BY  ME.  MUNEO 
Q.  Your  name  is—     A.    Barratt  O'Hara. 
Q.     What  official  position  do  you  hold  under  the  Con- 

144 


stitution  and  laws  of  the  State  of  Illinois  I  A.  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor of  Illinois  and  President  of  the  Senate. 

Q.  When  were  you  elected  Lieutenant-Governor? 
A.  In  the  fall  of  1912. 

Q.  You  presided  over  the  Senate  at  the  49th  General 
Assembly  ?  A.  I  did. 

Q.  And  the  Senate  adjourned  sine  die  on  June  30, 
1915?  A.  That  is  a  matter  of  record,  Mr.  Munro. 

Q.  You  have  not  any  independent  recollection  about 
that  matter?  A.  We  generally  do  have  about  matters 
of  record,  but  I  would  prefer  the  records  to  speak  for 
themselves. 

Q.    You  know  Charles  F.  Trick?    A.    I  do. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  known  him?  A.  At  least 
ten  years.  Let  me  modify  that ;  about  ten  years. 

Q.  Since  the  adjournment  of  the  49th  General  As- 
sembly, did  you  employ  him  in  any  capacity  in  your  office  ? 
A.  Since  the  adjournment,  the  sine  die  adjournment? 

Q.    Yes.    A.    No.  sir. 

Q.  Has  he  spent  time  in  your  office  since  that  date  ? 
A.  Yes. 

Q.  Does  he  make  his  headquarters  there?  A.  He 
comes  in  frequently.  I  would  not  say  that  he  makes  his 
headquarters  there,  or  yes  or  no  to  that.  It  is  how  he 
regards  it. 

Q.     You  see  him  frequently?    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  and  he  were  both  together  this  morning 
when  you  were  served  to  appear  here?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  employ  him  to  do  any  work  for  the 
Vice  Committee,  as  appointed  under  the  48th  General 
Assembly?  A.  The  Vice  Committee  under  the  48th? 

Q.  Yes.  A.  Well,  do  I  understand,  Mr.  Munro,  that 
this  inquiry  runs  back  into  the  48th? 

Q.  That  is  merely  inducement,  that  is  all.  It  does 
not.  A.  I  would  prefer  to  have  the  records  of  the  Com- 
mission speak  for  themselves  on  that. 

Q.  Are  the  records  of  the  Commission  available  ?  A. 
Not  until  they  are  reported  into  the  General  Assembly. 

Q.  In  whose  possession  are  the  records  of  the  Com- 
mission? A.  I  do  not  know. 

145 


Q.  Who  is  Secretary  of  the  Commission?  A.  The 
Secretary  of  the  Commission?  The  records  will  show 
that. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  or  not  your  brother  is  sec- 
retary? A.  My  brother  is  the  disbursing  agent  for  the 
Commission,  Mr.  Munro. 

Q.  You  won't  say  of  your  own  knowledge  who  is 
secretary  of  the  Commission?  A.  I  would  prefer  not  to 
say  anything  that  the  record  will  be  conclusive  on. 

Q.  How  are  we  to  ascertain  where  those  vouchers 
are  that  Mr.  Trick  has  just  now  testified  to,  and  which 
you  have  heard  him  testify  about  1  A.  That  is  a  matter 
— the  vouchers  will  be,  of  course,  reported  to  the  General 
Assembly  when  the  Committee  makes  its  final  report,  and, 
as  chairman  of  the  Committee,  I  have  no  authority  nor 
have  I  any  right  to  report  to  anyone  but  the  Senate,  the 
body  creating  the  Commission. 

Q.  That  does  not  answer  my  question  exactly,  Gov- 
ernor. I  want  to  know  where  we  can  obtain  those 
vouchers  and  other  documents  that  belong  to  this  Com- 
mittee that  have  been  paid  for  out  of  public  funds.  A. 
I  do  not  know  that  there  is  any  way,  Mr.  Munro,  that 
you  can  be  in  possession  of  those  until  they  are  reported 
to  the  Legislature.  The  Commission  has  no  authority  to 
surrender  them  to  any  other  body  than  the  body  creating 
the  Commission. 

Q.  Well,  the  Committee  appointed  under  the  48th 
General  Assembly  was  to  report  to  the  49th,  was  it  not? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  That  Committee  is  out  of  existence?  A.  The 
Committee  was  recognized  by  the  49th  General  Assembly ; 
was  praised  by  resolution  adopted  by  unanimous  vote,  and 
authorized  to  continue  its  labor  as  a  body  of  the  49th 
General  Assembly,  and,  may  I  add  to  that,  that  the  Special 
Session,  First  Special  Session  of  the  49th  General  As- 
sembly, made  request  of  the  Governor  in  the  form  of  a 
petition  to  include  the  matter  of  this  Commission  in  the 
call  for  any  special  session  of  the  Legislature. 

Q.  Have  you  in  your  possession  the  stenographic 
reports  and  the  list  of  expenses  of  the  Vice  Committee? 

146 


A.  That  question,  Mr.  Munro,  while  personally  I 
should  be  very  much  delighted  to  give  you  the  informa- 
tion, I  am  unable  to  do  so,  inasmuch  as  the  Commission 
must  report  to  the  body  creating  it,  and  it  is  my  belief  that 
it  would  be  improper  on  the  part  of  the  Commission  to  re- 
port to  anyone  other  than  to  the  legislative  body  cre- 
ating it. 

Q.  You  misunderstand  my  question.  I  ask  you  if 
you  have  it  in  your  possession.  I  don't  ask  you  to  show 
it  to  me.  A.  And  that  question  I  also  should  be  forced  to 
refuse  any  answer  to,  because  only  the  Senate  could 
properly  ask  that  question. 

Q.  You  approved  of  the  vouchers  issued  to  Mr. 
Trick,  which  you  have  heard  mentioned  in  the  testimony, 
did  you  not?  A.  All  of  the  vouchers,  the  certification  of 
which  is  required  by  resolution  of  the  Senate  or  by  law, 
were  either  approved  by  me  or  by  my  office,  as  required 
by  the  law  and  the  Constitution. 

Q.  You  approved  the  voucher  of  $5,500  to  your 
brother,  being  Voucher  No.  73626,  did  you  not  ?  A.  As 
to  any  specific  voucher,  Mr.  Munro,  the  record  and  the 
vouchers  must  speak  for  themselves. 

Q.  Have  you  any  independent  recollection  of  ap- 
proving that  voucher  of  $5,500  ?  A.  In  matters  of  legis- 
lative procedure,  I  imagine  that  the  records  go  further 
than  any  individual's  recollection. 

Q.  Is  your  answer  yes  or  no  to  that?  A.  My  an- 
swer is  as  to  all  the  other  questions  of  that  nature,  Mr. 
Munro,  that  the  records  must,  of  course,  speak  for  them- 
selves. 

Q.  Have  you  any  recollection  of  your  brother  pre- 
senting any  receipted  bills  for  the  sum  of  $5,500,  which 
was  paid  to  him  by  Voucher  No.  73626 ?  A.  That  would 
be  either  a  matter  of  action  by  the  Committee,  which 
must  report  to  the  Senate,  or  my  action  as  President  of 
the  Senate,  and  I,  of  course,  am  accountable  to  the  Senate 
for  any  neglect. 

Q.  That  is  not  my  question.  My  question  is,  have 
you  any  recollection  of  any  such  receipted  bills  or  vouch- 
ers? A.  I  have  no  recollection  of  anything  connected 

147 


with  the  performance  of  my  official  duties,  other  than  as 
the  records  of  that  performance  speak  for  themselves. 

Q.  Did  you  desire  to  have  an  appropriation  of 
$10,000  for  the  Vice  Committee,  appointed  or  to  be  ap- 
pointed under  the  49th  General  Assembly? 

MR.  MACEY:  I  don't  see  that  it  makes  any  differ- 
ence what  his  wishes  might  be  in  the  matter. 

MR.  MUNRO :    It  is  a  matter  of  inducement. 

A.  Mr.  Munro,  the  48th  General  Assembly  created  a 
Commission  to  investigate  the  matter  of  woman's  em- 
ployment, and  of  all  the  handicaps  to  and  the  menaces  of 
the  womanhood  of  the  State  of  Illinois.  That  Commission 
began  its  inquiry  by  calling  as  witnesses  a  number  of 
girls  who  had  morally  fallen.  These  girls  testified  under 
oath  that  their  downfall  had  been  partially  occasioned  by 
the  impossibility,  as  they  saw  it,  of  making  a  living  by 
honest  toil.  They  said  under  oath  that  they  had  found  it 
impossible  for  a  girl  in  the  City  of  Chicago  and  in  many 
parts  of  Illinois  to  keep  body  and  soul  together  on  the 
amount  of  money  she  was  paid  for  her  services  in  'honest 
industrial  employment.  The  Commission  then  called  as 
witnesses  thirty  or  forty  of  the  largest  and  most  influen- 
tial employers  in  the  City  of  Chicago.  These  men  testi- 
fied under  oath  that  they  had  conducted  investigations, 
voluntary  investigations,  and  had  found  as  a  result  of 
those  investigations  that  no  girl,  self-dependent,  could 
live  in  the  City  of  Chicago  on  less  than  $8  a  week.  They 
then  testified,  also  under  oath,  that  a  large  proportion,  or 
a  proportion,  at  least,  of  the  girls  and  women  employed 
by  them  were  paid  less  than  $8  a  week.  The  news  of  this 
investigation  was  spread  to  all  parts  of  the  United  States 
and  to  many  foreign  lands,  resulting  in  a  widespread  de- 
mand for  certain  social  reforms,  and  especially  for  a 
wage  adequate  for  a  girl  to  live  on.  As  a  result  of  this 
investigation,  and  the  notice  attracted  by  it,  four  states 
in  the  Union  immediately  enacted  minimum  wage  laws. 
Thirty-two  states  created  commissions  similar  to  the  Illi- 
nois Commission,  and,  according  to  the  figures  given  out 
by  an  eastern  magazine,  because  of  the  voluntary  action 
of  employers  whose  consciences  had  been  roused  by  this 

148 


revelation,  the  wages  of  a  half  million  working  girls  were 
raised  each  an  average  of  $2  a  week.  Despite  the  results 
attained  by  the  Commission,  with  the  assistance  of  power- 
ful newspapers  and  publishing  the  news  of  the  investiga- 
tion, and  despite  the  salvation  industrially  brought  to 
half  a  million  American  working  girls,  an  effort  was  made 
to  stifle  the  report  of  the  Committee  and  to  prevent  the 
publication  in  permanent  form  of  the  testimony  given 
before  this  Committee.  Over  one  thousand  letters  have 
been  received  by  me  as  chairman  of  the  Commission  dur- 
ing the  last  two  years  from  high  schools,  from  colleges, 
from  federal,  state  and  municipal  officials,  from  students 
of  social  conditions,  requesting  a  copy  of  the  report  and 
of  the  testimony  given  by  the  employers.  At  the  48th 
General  Assembly  no  further  appropriation  was  made  for 
the  continuation  of  the  Committee.  When  the  49th  Gen- 
eral Assembly  convened,  an  appropriation  of  $50,000  was 
voted,  the  bill  originating  in  the  Senate,  to  pay  the  ex- 
penses of  all  of  the  Committees  of  the  Senate  and  the 
House  of  the  49th  General  Assembly,  on  vouchers  signed 
by  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  incurring  the  expense, 
and  the  presiding  officer  of  the  House  appointing  the 
Committee.  This  appropriation  was  fixed  at  $50,000,  with 
the  express  understanding  that  at  least  $10,000  would 
be  available  for  the  purpose  of  the  continuance  of  the 
work  of  the  welfare — sometimes  called  white  slave — com- 
mittee. The  bill  of  appropriation  was  passed  in  due 
form,  was  signed  by  the  presiding  officers  of  both  branches 
of  the  Legislature,  and  by  the  Governor  of  (lie  State  of 
Illinois,  and,  containing  an  emergency  clause,  immedi- 
ately became  a  law. 

"Q.     $50,000?    A.    $50,000. 

Q.  This  year?  A.  The  49th  General  Assembly, 
for  Committee  expenses.  From  this  $50,000  a  total  of 
$10,000  was  drawn  to  pay  the  expenses  of  the  welfare 
or  white  slave  committee  of  the  49th  General  Assembly, 
and  to  provide  for  the  publication  of  the  report  and  the 
testimony  given  before  the  Committee.  These  vouchers 
were  drawn  in  regular  form,  in  the  most  open  manner 
possible,  and  the  money,  either  expenses  or  contracted 

149 


for  in  full,  before  the  sine  die  adjournment  of  the  49th 
General  Assembly.  Meanwhile,  when  the  consideration 
on  the  Omnibus  Bill  was  up,  the  Senate  voted  unanimously 
an  amendment  to  the  Omnibus  Bill  of  $10,000  for  the  use 
of  the  welfare  or  white  slave  committee.  This  $10,000 
was  in  excess  of  or  in  addition  to  the  $10,000  which  it 
was  understood  would  be  paid  from  the  General  Commit- 
tee Expense  Fund.  Because  of  opposition  in  the  House 
the  amendment  was  stricken  out  and  the  Welfare  Com- 
mission restricted  to  the  $10,000  which  it  was  generally 
understood  and  openly  known  was  to  be  expended  by  it 
from  the  General  Committee  Expense  Fund.  Three  hun- 
dred telegrams  are  assumed  or  reported  to  have  been  sent 
to  Springfield  in  the  effort  to  prevent  the  publication  of 
the  Committee's  report,  together  with  the  testimony  of 
the  thirty  or  forty  gentlemen  who  appeared  as  witnesses 
before  the  Committee.  In  answer  to  the  question,  Mr. 
Munro,  I  am  most  certainly  interested  in  having  pub- 
lished in  full  the  report  of  the  Committee,  together  with 
the  testimony  of  the  witnesses  before  the  Committee,  and 
shall  make  it  my  personal  business  to  see,  regardless  of 
all  the  efforts  which  may  be  made  to  stifle  and  prevent 
the  publication  of  this  Committee's  report,  that  it  is 
given  to  the  world  and  that  copies  of  the  report  and  the 
testimony  of  the  witnesses  are  sent  to  all  libraries,  to  all 
universities,  to  all  students  of  social  conditions,  and  all 
governments,  and  to  all  interested  citizens  desiring  a 
copy.  Have.  I  answered  it  sufficiently,  Mr.  Munro  1  • 

Q.    I  do  not  know  what  the  question  is  now,  it  is  so 
long  since  it  was  asked. 

(The  pending  question  was  then  read.) 
Q.  And  you  say  it  was  understood  that  you  were  to 
receive  out  of  the  $50,000  appropriation  the  sum  of  $10,- 
000?  Between  whom  was  it  understood?  A.  As  to  mat- 
ters in  which  members  of  the  Senate  are  concerned,  I 
can  give  no  testimony.  As  the  presiding  officer  of  the 
Senate,  I  have,  during  the  three  years  in  which  I  have 
been  connected  with  the  Senate,  or  of  the  Senate  collec- 
tively. In  conferences  held  with  me  by  members  of  the 
Senate,  any  such  conferences  I  have  always  regarded  as 

160 


sacred  as  the  confidences  of  lawyer  and  client,  or  of  a 
parishioner  with  his  religious  advisers.  To  pursue  any 
other  policy  would,  in  my  judgment,  be  indecent,  im- 
proper and  in  violation  of  all  of  the  precepts  by  which  a 
gentleman  is  presumed  to  conduct  himself  in  public  office. 

Q.  It  was  with  the  senators  individually,  then,  I 
take  it,  from  your  answer,  that  you  had  the  understand- 
ing? A.  As  to  that  I  must  refuse  any  answer,  for  the 
reason  above  given. 

Q.  Now,  you  were  to  receive  for  the  future  opera- 
tions of  your  Vice  Committee  $10,000  out  of  the  $50,000 
fund.  That  is  correct,  is  it?  A.  That  is  approximately 
correct.  I  said  at  least  $10,000,  and  I  think,  Mr.  Munro, 
in  order  that  there  may  be  no  misunderstanding  upon 
your  part,  or  upon  the  part  of  any  other  citizen,  you,  as 
a  former  legislator,  quite  understand  that,  in  arriving  at 
the  amount  of  an  appropriation  it  is  necessary  to  make 
certain  rough  estimates  as  to  the  amount  the  appropria- 
tion will  reach.  But  for  the  fact  of  the  $10,000,  pur- 
posed to  be  used  by  the  Senate  Welfare  Commission,  this 
committee  appropriation  would  have  been  $40,000. 

Q.  Then  the  additional  $10,000  was  placed  in  the 
$50,000  appropriation  for  the  future  operation  of  this 
Committee,  and  that  bill  was  passed?  A.  The  bill  was 
passed,  I  take  it,  in  due  form,  Mr.  Munro. 

Q.  It  so  appears  in  the  books.  And  then  you  re- 
ceived the  $10,000  ?  A.  The  $10,000  was  appropriated  to 
the  Senate  Vice  or  "Welfare  Commission. 

Q.  That  is  for  the  future  operations  of  it  and  the 
printing  of  this  report?  A.  You  partly  misunderstand, 
Mr.  Munro.  I  think  that  my  answer  to  that — can  the  re- 
porter find  my  answer  to  that  ? 

MB.  MUNRO :    I  think  you  can  answer  it  over  again. 

A.  I  can  perhaps  reinform  you  as  to  that.  To  pay 
the  expenses  that  had  been  incurred  during  the  49th  Gen- 
eral Assembly,  of  course,  by  the  Committee,  and  also  to 
pay  for  the  publication  of  the  report,  or  of  the  contracts, 
all  of  which  were  entered  into  before  the  Senate  adjourn- 
ment— the  sine  die  adjournment  of  the  49th  General 
Assembly. 

151 


Q.  Then  it  was  not  for  the  future  expenses  ?  A.  The 
work  may  not  have  been  performed  at  that  time.  I  know 
that  some  of  the  work  was  not  actually  performed  at  that 
time.  It  was  all  contracted  for  at  that  time. 

Q.  Well,  this  resolution  passed  on  June  14th.  When 
was  the  work  performed;  after  June  14th?  A.  I  did 
not  quite  understand  the  question. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  work  was  all  contracted  for 
at  that  time.  When  was  it  contracted  for  ?  A.  I  do  not 
know  that  we  exactly  understand  one  another,  Mr.  Munro. 
If  you  will  permit  me,  I  will  repeat.  The  $10,000  given 
the  Committee  was  either  to  pay  out  for  work  actually 
performed  up  to  the  sine  die  adjournment  or  for  services, 
the  performance  of  which  was  contracted  for  between  the 
date — between  the  convening  and  the  sine  die  adjourn- 
ment of  the  49th  General  Assembly. 

Q.  Now,  Mr.  O'Hara — or,  pardon  me,  Governor— 
the  printing  of  that  report  has  not  been  done,  has  it!  A. 
No,  sir. 

Q.    It  is  a  voluminous  report  I    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    It  will  cost  considerable  money?    A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Part  of  this  money  was  drawn  for  the  purpose 
of  printing  that  report  ?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Where  is  that  money  now?  A.  That  money  is 
either  in  the  hands  of  the  committee,  somewhat  in  the 
nature  of  trustee  for  the  contractor,  or  has  been  paid  to 
those  persons  with  whom  the  committee  entered  into  a 
contract  for  the  publication  of  the  report. 

Q.  But  the  report  has  not  been  published?  A.  The 
report — I  have  not  been  informed  that  the  report  has 
been  published. 

Q.  Then  our  conclusion  is,  from  your  testimony, 
that  a  considerable  sum  of  money,  which  was  drawn  out 
by  these  vouchers,  is  now  in  the  hands  of  some  person 
being  held  for  the  printing  of  this  report.  Is  that  cor- 
rect? A.  This,  Mr.  Munro,  enters  into  a  matter  in  which 
only  the  Senate  can  be  officially  interested.  In  order, 
however,  that  my  position  (or  the  position,  rather,  of  the 
committee)  may  not  be  misunderstood,  permit  me  to  make 
this  statement :  A  portion  of  the  $10.000  was  appropri- 

152 


ated  by  the  committee  for  the  finishing,  the  editing  and 
the  printing  and  publication,  distribution  and  mailing  of 
the  report,  the  contract  for  which  work  was  entered  into 
prior  to  the  sine  die  adjournment  of  the  49th  General 
Assembly.  The  effect  of  this  litigation  is  to  delay  the 
actual  distribution  of  this  report,  and,  in  the  event  of 
the  success  of  this  litigation,  further  to  stifle  its  publica- 
tion. 

Q.  You  are  a  practicing  lawyer,  Mr.  O'Hara?  A. 
For  what  good  is  that  asked? 

Q.  I  am  just  asking  it.  You  are  a  member  of  the 
Bar?  A.  Yes,  I  am  a  member  of  the  Bar.  Q.  You  are 
a  practicing  lawyer?  A.  Yes.  Q.  You  are  familiar 
with  the  law,  which  requires  all  printing  of  reports  to  be 
let  under  a  State  contract,  through  the  Board  of  State 
Contracts,  are  you  not?  A.  May  I  ask  what  is  the  date 
of  that  law,  Mr.  Munro  ? 

Q.  Well,  it  is  Kurd's  1913  Statutes,  March  31st, 
1874,  and  with  amendments  thereto.  It  is  down  to  date, 
except  the  last.  A.  Has  that  law  been  amended  re- 
cently? Q.  Yes,  the  Printers'  Act  of  1915  amended  that 
law. 

A.  My  answer  to  your  question  is,  of  course,  that  on 
the  part  of  either  lawyer  or  layman,  that  the  law  does 
not  presume  ignorance  of  the  law. 

Q.  Well,  I  just  asked  you  if  you  are  familiar  with 
that.  Of  course,  you  could  have  said  whether  you  were  or 
not,  it  would  not  have  made  any  difference.  In  your  ap- 
proval of  vouchers,  Mr.  O'Hara,  your  vouchers  were  all 
approved,  were  they  not,  as  a  universal  rule,  for  actual 
moneys  spent?  You  never  approved  any  vouchers,  did 
you,  whereby  a  person  said  he  desired  money  which  he 
intended  to  spend,  in  your  official  position  at  Springfield  ? 
A.  As  I  understand  the  question,  Mr.  Munro,  such  a 
procedure  never  could  occur. 

Q.  The  public  moneys  are  in  the  State  Treasury, 
until  the  bills  are  presented  for  their  payment,  is  that 
not  correct  ?  A.  All  of  that  is  a  matter,  as  I  understand, 
of  law,  and  the  law  presumes  neither  ignorance  of  the 
law  on  your  part  or  on  my  part. 

153 


Q.  According  to  your  testimony,  there  is  a  certain 
considerable  sum  of  money  now  outstanding,  that  belongs 
to  the  State  of  Illinois,  that  is  not  yet  subject  to  be  spent 
in  some  man's  hands,  for  the  printing  of  this  report.  Is 
that  the  situation?  A.  As  I  understand  the  law  of  con- 
tracts, Mr.  Munro,  an«  amount  of  money  may  become  due 
and  payable  long  before  the  performance  of  the  serv- 
ices called  for  in  the  contract. 

Q.  That  is  not  the:  point.  I  do  not  think  you  get 
me  exactly.  I  am  sure  your  answer  would  be  correct  if 
you  did  understand  my  question.  My  question  is,  that 
there  is  a  considerable  sum  of  money  which  will  be  used 
in  the  future,  and  required  in  the  future,  for  printing  the 
voluminous  report,  which  is  now  outstanding,  and  in  the 
hands  of  some  person;  that  the  money  was  drawn  from 
the  public  treasury  in  the  appropriation  of  $50,000.00. 
That  is  the  situation  as  I  understand  it.  A.  I  fail  to 
see,  Mr.  Munro,  where  your  understanding  could  have 
come  from,  or  how  it  could  have  come  from  anything 
said  by  me. 

Q.  Well,  is  your  understanding  different!  Perhaps 
I  have  not  understood  you  correctly.  A.  Will  you  allow 
the  reporter  to  read  that  ? 

Q.  Why,  I  can  do  so  if  you  prefer  to  have  it  that 
way.  If  you  don't  understand  that  your  testimony  is  to 
that  effect,  I  want  to  correct  you  and  make  it  plain  to 
you?  A.  Let  us  understand  one  another,  so  that  you 
will  be  well  informed  in  the  matter. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  have  testified  that  a  cer- 
tain portion  of  this  $10,000  was-  held  in  reserve  for  the 
printing  of  this  report.  Is  that  correct!  A.  I  said  that 
it  was  appropriated  for  the  printing  of  the  report. 

Q.  But  the  entire  $10,000  has  been  drawn,  has  it 
not? 

A.  The  entire  $10,000  has  been  drawn,  and  contracts 
entered  into  for  services  requiring  the  entire  $10,000. 

Q.     Which  includes  the  printing  of  the  report? 

A.     Which  includes  the  printing  of  the  report. 

Q.  The  report  has  not  yet  been  printed?  A.  The 
printed  report  has  not  been  turned  over  to  the  committee. 

154 


Q.  Has  the  printing  been  ordered?  A.  I  said  that 
all  the  services  had  been  contracted  for,  which,  of  course, 
implies  that  the  printing  had  been  ordered. 

Q.  Who  has  it  been  contracted  for  by?  A.  That 
is  a  matter  of  record  of  the  committee,  and  of  course 
can  only  be  reported  to  the  Senate. 

Q.  Is  there  any  reason  why  you  should  not  state, 
as  a  public  official,  with  whom  the  contract  is  made  ?. 

A.  The  very  best  of  reasons,  Mr.  Munro;  because 
my  duty  as  President  of  the  Senate,  and  as  chairman  of 
this  committee,  requires  me  to  make  my  report  first  to 
the  Senate,  and  before  that  time  I  am  not  at  liberty, 
much  as  I  should  like  to  be  personally — in  an  official  way, 
I  am  not  at  liberty  to  give  out  that  information. 

Q.  Has  there  been  any  bids  offered,  as  required  by 
the  Constitution,  for  public  printing?  A.  This  question, 
Mr.  Munro,  as  the  previous  one,  is  only  a  matter  properly 
for  inquiry  on  the  part  of  the  Senate,  and  I  have  no 
right  to  return  an  answer  to  any  one  other  than  the 
Senate. 

Q.  In  the  office  at  29  La  Salle  Street,  about  which 
Mr.  Trick  testified — was  that  also  your  law  office,  Mr. 
O'Hara? 

A.  Part  of  that  office  was,  for  a  part  of  that  period 
of  time.  Further  on  that  point,  while  a  member  of  the 
Bar,  and  a  practicing  attorney,  I  have  given  very  little 
time  to  my  private  practice,  finding  that  the  attitude  of 
the  public  was  to  regard  me  as  constitutionally  confined 
to  the  official  duties  of  the  office  of  Lieutenant-Governor. 
Of  course,  the  presumption  is,  and  the  practice  always 
has  been,  that  the  Lieutenant-G-overnor,  as  well  as  the 
members  of  the  Legislature,  must  look  after  their  em- 
ployment and  not  confine  all  of  their  activities  to  their 
official  duties.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  during  the  three 
years  that  I  have  been  in  office,  over  nine-tenths  of  my 
time  has  been  given  to  the  duties  of  the  State  of  Illinois. 
During  my  occupancy  of  the  office  at  29  South  La  Salle 
Street,  I  did  very  little  law  business,  if  any.  The  rent, 
however,  of  these  offices  was  paid  almost  entirely  from 
my  private  pocket,  or  from  my  private  means,  and  if 

155 


an  accounting  were  to  be  rendered,  I  presume  that  the 
State  of  Illinois  would  be  indebted  to  me  for  money  ad- 
vanced and  paid  for  rent,  on  premises-  which  were  largely 
used,  not  for  my  personal  profit,  but  for  the  benefit  of 
the  people  of  the  State,  of  which  I  am  an  official. 

Q.  But  you  did  use  the  office  for  your  private  law 
office  during  the  months  of  January,  February  and  March, 
1915!  A.  To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I  did  not. 
During  those  months  the  Legislature  was  in  session,  arid 
I  gave  all  of  my  time  to*  the  State,  and  I  have  no  recol- 
lection of  using  my  office  as  a  law  office,  or  of  appearing 
in  any  case  of  litigation,  except  as  I  might  now  and  then 
have  appeared,  without  one  cent  of  payment,  for  some 
poor  fellow  without  means,  and  whom  I  believed  to  be 
persecuted.  As  an  example  of  this,  recently  I  appeared 
in  one  of  the  Municipal  Courts — 

Q.  Well,  now,  Governor!  I  have  no  objection  to 
your  filling  the  record  up  with  a  lot  of  matters  that  are 
not  material,  and  are  not  proper  answers.  I  always  like 
to  hear  you  talk ;  what  you  say  is  good. 

A.     Thank  you,  sir. 

Q.     But  I  don't  think  it  is  germane  to  my  question? 

A.  It  is  not  exactly,  that  is  so,  Mr.  Munro.  But  I 
have  made  such  sacrifice  of  my  time,  that  I  don't  want 
anything  in  the  record  here  that  will  indicate  that  an 
office  that  was  partly  used  by  me  for  State  purposes  was 
my  law  office,  and  that  I  had  it  open  as  a  matter  of  profit. 

Q.  You  are  entitled  to  a  full  explanation,  Mr. 
O'Hara.  Were  you  familiar  with  the  amount  of  funds 
that  Mr.  Trick  was  expending,  which  shows  to  be 
$1,199.45,  as  "an  angel,"  for  this  committee?  Were  you 
familiar  with  that  fact  during  the  time  that  he  was  spend- 
ing this  money  1  Did  you  know  of  it 

MR.  MACEY :    That  question  involves — 

MR.  MUNRO:  Say  yes  or  no?  A.  I  had  known 
Mr.  Trick  for  a  great  many  years,  and  have  never  known 
him  to  do  anything  that  was  not  entirely  honest.  I  regard 
Mr.  Trick  as  a  man  of  the  highest  honor,  and  any  intima- 
tion that  Mr.  Trick  would  be  even  careless  in  an  expense 
account  is  to  me  preposterous  and  ridiculous. 

156 


Q.  Don't  you  think  the  best  way  to  answer  that, 
Mr.  O'Hara,  would  be  by  Mr.  Trick  coming  back  here 
with  the  vouchers,  showing  what  he  spent  this  money 
for? 

A.  Mr.  Trick  served  the  Senate  Welfare  Commis- 
sion, and  the  Senate  Welfare  Commission  served  the  Sen- 
ate. As  the  Senate  Welfare  Commission  can  only  report 
and  is  only  answerable  to  the  Senate,  Mr.  Trick  is  only 
answerable  to  the  Commission. 

Q.     Claiborne  S.  Close.    Do  you  know  him? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  What  position  did  he  hold  in  the  49th  General 
Assembly? 

A.     The  records  will  show. 

Q.  Have  you  no  recollection  on  the  matter,  Mr. 
O'Hara? 

A.  As  before  stated,  Mr.  Munro,  where  there  are 
records,  the  records  must  speak  for  themselves. 

Q.  What  position  does  he  now  hold?  A.  The 
record  will  show. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  known  Mr.  Claiborne  S.' 
Close? 

A.     For  two  years,  two  years  or  more. 

Q.  You  approved  his  voucher,  No.  77888,  dated 
June  25th,  1915,  for  expenses  contracted  for  in  the  hold- 
ing of  committee  meetings,  for  traveling,  hotel,  telephone, 
messenger,  and  other  expenditures  of  members  of  the 
committee  in  the  performance  of  their  duties,  $962.70? 

A.     The  record  will  show. 

Q.  I  have  not  asked  you  the  question.  Just  a  mo- 
ment. Did  you  have  before  you  vouchers  and  bills  for 
that  amount  of  money  before  you  approved  that  voucher  ? 

A.  This  question,  having  to  do  with  the  concerns  of 
the  committee,  created  by  the  Senate,  and  a  committee 
that  has  not  yet  reported  to  the  Senate,  it  would  be  im- 
proper for  me  to  give  any  answer  other  than  to  the 
Senate. 

Q.  Have  you  any  recollection  of  seeing  any  re- 
ceipted bills  or  vouchers,  upon  which  this  voucher  of 
$962.70  was  based,  before  you  approved  the  same? 

157 


A.  For  the  same  reason,  I  must  officially — although 
personally  with  regrets — decline  to  answer. 

Q.  He  is  now  janitor,  is  he  not,  to  the  Lieutenant- 
G-overrior,  drawing  a  salary  of  $720  a  year!  A.  If  this 
be  so,  it  is  a  matter  of  official  record. 

Q.    You  knew  Ralph  Pope  well!    A.    I  did. 

Q.  What  was  the  nature  of  his  work  generally,  what 
did  he  do  for  a  living?  A.  Ealph  Pope;  three  years 
ago  or  thereabouts,  when  the  newsboys  of  Chicago  and 
the  pressmen  went  on  a  strike  for  better  industrial  condi- 
tions, he  was  employed  by  one  of  the  Chicago  afternoon 
papers  as  district  man.  He  was  regarded  as  one  of  the 
best  circulation  men  in  this  country.  He  held  a  good 
position.  This  position  he  voluntarily  and  immediately 
surrendered  in  order  that  he  might  stand  with  his  friends 
and  comrades  in  their  strike  for  better  conditions.  I 
was  associated  with  Ralph  Pope  at  that  time.  Our  friend- 
ship grew  into  love.  After  the  strike,  Mr.  Pope  was 
refused  employment  on  Chicago  newspapers  because  of 
his  participation  in  the  strike,  and  his  loyalty  to  the  other 
'  newsboys  of  Chicago.  During  that  period  of  three  years 
Mr.  Pope  lived  as  best  he  could,  finding  such  employment 
as  he  could,  despite  the  constant  opposition  with  which 
he  found  his  efforts  met,  on  the  part  of  those  persons 
who  disapproved  of  his  industrial  position.  Mr.  Pope 
did  service  for  the  Welfare  or  White  Slave  Committee, 
and,  as  chairman  of  that  committee,  I  wish  the  record  to 
show  that  I  regard  Mr.  Pope's  services  as  of  inestimable 
value,  and  without  which  the  progress  made  by  the  com- 
mittee and  the  tremendous  results  achieved  by  it,  could 
not  have  been  accomplished. 

Q.  He  was  a  newsboy,  wasn't  he1?  That  is,  he  was 
a  boy  that  drove  a  wagon,  and  delivered  the  newspapers, 
was  he  not  ?  That  was  his  ordinary  vocation  ? 

A.  Mr.  Pope  was  much  more  than  a  newsboy.  He 
was  a  genius.  Until  the  newspaper  strike  of  three  years 
ago,  Mr.  Pope,  according  to  my  information,  was  what 
is  known  as  a  district  man  in  the  circulation  department. 
He  had  charge  of  the  distribution  of  papers  in  the  Loop 
District,  not,  however,  as  a  wagon  man.  I  don't  think 

158 


he  was  a  wagon  man.  Q.  Between  the  15th  of  June, 
1915,  and  the  29th  of  June,  1915,  the  record  shows  that 
you  approved  vouchers  for  Ealph  Pope  for  $1,341.60. 
A.  The  records  will  show. 

Q.  Were  the  vouchers  made  upon  receipted  bills,  or 
other  evidence  of  the  expenses  having  been  incurred  and 
presented  to  you  before  you  approved  of  the  vouchers 
to  Ralph  Pope? 

A.  The  records  of  the  committee  will  show,  and  the 
committee  will  in  due  season  report  to  the  Senate.  Before 
that  time  I  am  estopped  from  discussing  the  affairs  of 
the  committee,  for  the  reason  given  in  previous  answers. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  state  that  the  record  will 
show  these  items  of  expense,  upon  which  these  vouchers 
were  made? 

A.     The  records,  yes,  of  course. 

Q.  Is  there  any  reason  why  these  expense  vouchers 
did  not  go  along  with  the  voucher  to  the  Auditor? 

A.  The  committee  has  not  yet  reported  to  the  Sen- 
ate, and  before  that  time  neither  the  committee  nor  any 
member  of  it  can  discuss  the  affairs  of  the  committee. 

Q.  How  do  you  explain  the  fact,  Governor,  that 
these  vouchers  total  up  exactly  $10,000?  Is  that  a  mere 
coincidence?  A.  In  what  way  a  coincidence? 

Q.  Have  you  added  up  these  vouchers  yet,  your- 
self? 

A.  I  know  that,  as. stated  before,  $10,000  was  the 
amount  given  to  the  committee,  and  the  committee  would 
have  no  authority  to  spend  one  cent  more  than  $10,000, 
nor  is  it  to  be  presumed  that,  having  asked  $10.000,  the 
committee  would  spend  one  cent  less  than  $10,000,  espe- 
cially as  it  had  looked  for  $20,000  to  do  the  work  it  was 
finally  required  to  do  with  $10,000. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  conference  with  Andrew  Bus- 
sell  on  the  18th  or  19th  of  June,  1915,  relative  to  this  sum 
of  $10,000?  A.  Matters  of  conference  with  other  State 
officers  I  regard  in  the. same  nature  as  I  regard  confer- 
ences with  members  of  the  Senate ;  as  in  the  nature  of  a 
communication  between  lawyer  and  client,  or  between 
parishioner  and  religious  leader. 

159 


Q.  Did  you  have,  about  that  time,  any  conference 
with  Auditor  Brady  or  his  assistant,  John  K.  Seagrave, 
with  reference  to  the  paying  of  the  sum  of  $10,000?  A. 
The  answer  to  this  question  is  the  same  as  that  to  the 
previous  question. 

Q.  Did  you  at  any  time  state  to  Andrew  Russell 
that  Dave  Shanahan  was  trying  to  prevent  you  from  get- 
ting $10,000  to  continue  your  White  Slave  Committee, 
and  ask  Mr.  Russell  if  he  would  be  willing  to  pay  the 
same  out  of  the  State  Treasury?  A.  The  answer  to  this 
is  the  same  as  to  the  preceding  question. 

Q.  I  note  that  Resolution  No.  60,  on  page  12  of  the 
Senate  Journal,  reads  as  follows:  "Resolved,  that 
Charles  F.  Trick  be  appointed,  and  he  is  hereby  ap- 
pointed, Chief  Clerk  in  the  office  of  the  Law  Secretary  of 
the  Senate,  at  a  per  diem  of  $6  per  day,  to  date  from 
April  5,  1915."  Resolution  introduced  by  Mr.  Ettelson. 
Did  you  know  in  advance  that  Mr.  Ettelson  would  intro 
duce  that  resolution  f 

A.  The  same  answer  to  that  as  to  the  other  ques- 
tions. 

Q.  Did  you  know  about  the  time  that  Mr.  Trick 
came  to  Springfield,  to  go  to  work  in  the  position  of  Chief 
Clerk  in  the  office  of  the  Law  Secretary? 

A.  You  can  scarcely  expect  me,  Mr.  Munro,  to  re- 
member when  all  the  employes  came  to  Springfield,  the 
days  they  were  there  and  the  days  they  were  not  there. 

Q.    You  heard  the  testimony,  that  he  did  not — 

A.  In  answer,  however,  the  printed  records  of  the 
Senate  will  show  that  regularly,  generally  once  a  week, 
and  sometimes  oftener,  as  President  of  the  Senate,  I 
asked  the  Sergeant-at-Arms  (who  by  rule  is  authorized 
to  see  that  all  employes  are  at  work)  if  all  the  employes 
on  the  pay-roll  of  the  Senate  were  at  work.  This  was  in 
strict  compliance  with  law  of  right  and  justice,  and  of 
common  sense. 

The  balance  of  Mr.  O'Hara's  testimony  appears  in 
ihe  chapter  which  deals  with  Resolution  No.  77. 

160 


TESTIMONY  OF  F.  H.  O'HARA 

F.  H.  O'HAEA, 

a  witness  of  lawful  age,  produced  as  a  witness  on  behalf 
of  the  plaintiff,  being  by  me  first  duly  sworn  to  testify 
the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth, 
deposeth  and  saith  as  follows: 

DIRECT  EXAMINATION  BY  MB.  MUNRO : 

Q.     What  is  your  name  ?    A.    F.  H.  0  'Hara. 

Q.  What  relation  are  you  to  Barratt  O'Hara?  A. 
His  brother. 

Q.     How  old  are  you!    A.    Twenty-four. 

Q.  What  is  your  jtresent  employment ?  A.  I  have 
no  permanent  employment. 

Q.     You  live  at  home  with  your  parents?    A.    I  do. 

Q.  Have  you  worked  during  the  year  1915  for  any- 
body? 

A.     I  have. 

Q.    Who  for?    A.    I  have  worked  for  my  brother. 

Q.     In  what  capacity?    A.    As  his  secretary. 

Q.     In  the  office?    A.    Partly. 

Q.     At  a  stipulated  salary?    A.    Not  from  him. 

Q.  Well,  from  whom?  A.  I  am  employed  as  a 
secretary. 

Q.  Secretary  of  what?  A.  For  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor. 

Q.  Oh.  How  much  do  you  receive  as  secretary  of 
the  Lieutenant-Go vernor  ?  A.  $200  a  month. 

Q.  When  were  you  appointed  ?  A.  I  was  appointed 
at  the  beginning  of  the  48th  General  Assembly,  I  believe. 

Q.  You  have  held  that  position  ever  since?  A.  I 
have. 

Q. .  Then  you  have  been  employed  recently  ?  A.  Yes, 
I  have. 

Q.  Where  do  you  have  your  office?  A.  I  misunder- 
stood your  previous  question.  I  was  thinking  about  an- 
other matter. 

Q.  Where  do  you  have  your  office?  A.  My  office 
is  anywhere  that  I  have  one  with  my  brother,  being  his 
secretary. 

161 


Q.  Your  office  is  at  Springfield,  isn't  it!  A.  Xo, 
I  think  not. 

Q.    Well,  where  do  you  keep  your  papers  and  files  ? 

ME.  BAEEATT  O'HAEA:  Will  you  have  the  rec- 
ord show  there  that  the  Constitution  provides  that  the 
Lieutenant-Governor  must  not  necessarily  be  a  resident 
of  the  State  Capitol! 

ME.  MTJNEO:  Q.  Quite  right.  We  will  have  the 
record  show  that.  Where  do  you  keep  your  papers  and 
files,  as  secretary? 

A.  I  keep  them  in  my  possession.  I  don't  believe, 
Mr.  Munro,  that  I  am  compelled  to  answer  where  I  keep 
all  my  papers. 

Q.  Why,  no,  I  don't  ask  you  to  do  that.  You  keep 
them  in  your  possession?  A.  I  keep  them  in  my  pos- 
session. 

Q.  Did  you  hold  any  position  for  the  White  Slave 
Committee? 

A.    I  did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  receive  the  sum  of  $5,500  on  or  about 
June  30th,  1915,  from  the  State  of  Illinois?  A.  I  re- 
ceived such  sum,  yes.  I  am  not  sure  as  to  the  date. . 

Q.  Did  you  receive  it  in  check  or  currency!  A.  I 
received  a  regular  voucher  for  the  amount. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  the  voucher  ?  A.  I  cashed 
the  voucher. 

Q.    In  currency?    A.    Yes,  in  currency. 

Q.  Where  did  you  cash  it?  A.  I  believe  that  the 
records  of  that  voucher  will  show  where  it  was  cashed. 

Q.  Oh,  no,  don't  dodge  behind  that,  Mr.  O'Hara. 
A.  Pardon  me.  I  am  not  trying  to  dodge.  The  records 
of  the  State  of  Illinois  will  show  where  the  voucher  was 
cashed,  as  you  must  know. 

Q.  Cashed  in  the  Treasurer's  office?  A.  Well,  if 
that  is  the  case  the  records  will  show  it. 

Q.  Don't  you  remember  where  you  cashed  $5,500 
worth  of  vouchers? 

A.    I  prefer  the  records  to  show  it. 

Q.  I  know,  but  what  is  the  use  of  going  back  of  that 
thing?  If  you  know,  why  don't  you  tell? 

162 


A.     The  records  will  show. 

Q.  Did  you  receive  from  the  Auditor's  office  the 
vouchers  for  Trick,  Pope  and  Close,  being  nine  vouch- 
ers, and  totaling  $4,500,  on  June  30th?  A.  If  so  the 
records  will  show. 

Q.  Oh,  no,  they  won't.  There  are  no  records  about 
that.  I  am  asking  you  if  you  got  them!  A.  I  am  reply- 
ing if  I  did  the  records  will  show. 

Q.     Don't  you  know  whether  you  got  them  or  not? 

A.     The  records  will  show. 

Q.     Did  you  ever  have  in  your  hands  those  vouchers  ! 

A.  If  those  vouchers  were  in  my  hands — why,  I 
think  the  records  will  show  as  to  that. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  records  of  the  State  of  Illinois 
would  show  what  a  man  has  in  his  hands! 

A.  I  cannot  go  into  the  question  of  what  I  have  had 
in  my  hands  here,  Mr.  Munro.  I  may  have  passed  a  hun- 
dred papers  to  my  brother  across  his  desk,  and  I  may  or 
may  not  have  had  those  in  my  hands. 

Q.  Wouldn't  you  know  if  you  had  in  your  hands 
vouchers  or  warrants  totaling  $4,500,  on  this  particular 
day! 

A.  I  may  or  may  not  have  had  them.  I  have  an- 
swered the  specific  question  that  I  had  a  voucher  made 
out  to  me,  and  the  records  will  show  that. 

Q.  I  ask  you  under  oath,  Mr.  0  'Kara,  whether  you 
did  not.  go,  on  July  9th,  and  cash  $4,500  of  vouchers  in 
the  Treasurer's  office? 

MR.  BABEATT  O'HAEA:  We  must  object  to  the 
use  of  that  language,  " Under  oath."  This  entire  pro- 
cedure is  irregular,  and  we  are  here  merely  as  an  accom- 
modation to  the  newspaper  men,  and  the  words,  ''under 
oath, ' '  must  be  taken  out. 

MR.  MUNRO:    Oh,  I  did  not  know  that  you  were 
here  to  accommodate  the  newspaper  men.     I  supposed 
you  came  in  answer  to  a  subpoena. 
(Question  read.) 

A.     My  answer  is,  if  I  did  so,  the  records  will  show. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  the  $5,500  that  you  got  in 
currency!  A.  That,  I  feel,  is  a  matter  for  me  to  explain 

163 


only  to  the  Commission,  and  the  Commission  to  explain 
to  the  Senate. 

Q.  Was  that  money  for  the  Commission'/  A.  I 
acted  as  disbursing  agent  for  the  committee. 

Q.  Did  you  receive  a  salary  for  that  1  A.  I  did  not. 
I  never  have  had  any  official  position  with  the  committee, 
and  I  never  did  receive  a  penny  from  it. 

Q.    Are  you  still  disbursing  agent  for  them! 

A.  I  received  that  money  to  be  disbursed,  and  other 
than  that  I  do  not  care  to  say. 

Q.  Have  you  disbursed  that  money?  A.  I  don't 
care  to  answer.  Whatever  I  have  done  will  show  defi- 
nitely and  very  explicitly  in  the  report  of  the  committee 
on  that  subject. 

Q.  Where  is  that  report  I  A.  That  is  all  a  matter 
between  me  and  the  committee.  The  records  of  the  com- 
mittee will  be  very  explicit. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  any  of  that  money  out  for  any  bills 
of  the  committee  ?  A.  I  cannot  answer  that,  for  the  same 
reason. 

Q.  Did  you  pay  any  portion  of  that  for  the  bills  of 
the  committee?  A.  I  can  make  explanation  only  to  the 
committee. 

Q.  Have  you  any  recollection  of  having  paid  any  of 
that  sum  for  bills?  A.  I  cannot  go  on  record  for  recol- 
lection, Mr.  Munro.  I  am  under  oath,  and  I  cannot  do 
that. 

Q.  When  you  cashed  that  voucher,  did  you  get  it  in 
$100  bills,  or  in  small  amounts'?  A.  I  refuse  to  answer 
that  question. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  I  A.  I  refuse  to  go  on  record, 
for  recollection.  I  have  answered  that  I  cashed  the 
voucher. 

Q.  And  got  the  currency!  A.  And  got  the  cur- 
rency. 

Q.  What  is  that  I  A.  Received  the  currency,  I  sup- 
pose. 

Q.  Did  you  keep  a  bank  account  yourself,  a  per- 
sonal checking  account?  A.  I  should  much  prefer  not  to 
go  into  my  personal  affairs,  Mr.  Munro. 

164 


Q.  Did  you  keep  any  account  as  disbursing  agent, 
with  any  bank,  for  this  committee  I  A.  That,  too,  I  feel 
I  should  make  my  explanation  to  the  committee,  and  not 
here. 

Q.  Who  are  the  members  of  the  committee,  that  you 
have  to  explain  to,  what  are  their  names'?  A.  That  is  a 
matter  of  record,  also. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  their  names  are?  A.  I  be- 
lieve that  I  know  the  names,  yes.  I  know  the  gentlemen. 

Q.  Name  them,  for  my  information?  A.  I  don't 
see  the  necessity  of  that. 

MR.  BABBATT  O'HABA:  We  object  to  anything 
that  is  in  the  form  of  records.  The  records  speak  for 
themselves  in  everything,  as  you  know,  as  a  lawyer. 

MB.  MUNBO:  Q.  Who  appointed  you  disbursing 
agent  of  the  committee  ? 

A.     That  is  a  matter  of  record  with  the  committee. 

Q.  How  do  you  know  it  is  a  matter  of  record  with 
the  committee? 

A.  I  don't  feel  that  that  is  a  proper  question,  Mr. 
Munro. 

Q.     Have  you  seen  the  records  of  the  committee! 

A.  I  cannot  tell  you  whether  I  have  seen  them  or 
not.  That  would  be  a  confidential  matter  between  me  and 
the  committee. 

Q.  You  have  said  that  those  things  were  all  matters 
of  record  with  the  committee.  Do  you  know  that  to  be  so, 
do  you  know  that  they  are  matters  of  record  with  the 
committee  ? 

A.    I  believe  it  to  be  so. 

Q.  Upon  what  do  you  base  your  belief?  A.  My 
very  accurate  knowledge  that — as  far  as  my  knowledge 
goes,  everything  has  been  a  matter  of  record  with  the 
committee.  Nothing  has  been  left  to  imagination  or  to 
recollection. 

Q.  It  is  all  recorded,  every  transaction  of  the  com- 
mittee has  been  recorded?  A.  I  believe  so. 

Q.  And  every  disbursement  has  been  recorded?  A. 
I  believe  so. 

Q.     Well,  do  you  know?     A.     I  believe  so.     I  am 

165 


merely  an  unpaid  disbursing  agent  for  the  committee, 
and  I  cannot  tell  yon  definitely  what  the  committee  has 
done. 

Q.  As  disbursing  agent,  do  you  disburse  the  money 
out  in  cash  or  by  check?  A.  I  cannot  answer  any  ques- 
tion of  that  sort.  I  shall  answer  it  only  to  the  committee. 

Q.  Can't  you  tell  us  the  form  through  which  this 
large  sum  of  money  goes  out  for  various  things?  A.  I 
don't  care  to. 

Q.  How  much  of  that  $5.500  is  still  on  hand,  in  the 
control  of  the  disbursing  agent?  A.  I  can  tell  that  only 
to  the  committee. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  much  ?  A.  I  can  answer  none 
of  those  questions  except  to  the  committee. 

MB.  BABKATT  O'HABA:  Now  may  I  suggest  to 
you  that  courtesy  is  being  rather  strained  here.  We  came 
here  as  an  act  of  accommodation — 

MB.  MUXBO:  I  don't  think  so.  You  came  here  in 
response  to  a  subprena. 

A  VOICE :  What  would  have  happened  if  he  did  not 
attend  ? 

MB.  BARB  ATT  O'HABA:  You  know  the  entire 
irregularity  of  the  proceeding.  We  are  not  placing  you 
in  an  embarrassing  position.  You  are  a  lawyer,  and  I 
presume  that  you  know  that  we  are  here  merely  as  a 
courtesy. 

MB.  MT7XBO :  We  are  now  taking  testimony  before 
a  Master  in  Chancery  in  a  regular  proceeding,  according 
to  the  Statute.  We  have  subpo?naed  each  of  you  people 
regularly.  Nevertheless,  I  don't  wish  any  discourtesy 
to  any  of  the  witnesses,  in  any  court  proceeding. 

THE  WITNESS :  I  feel  that  I  am  here  as  a  matter 
of  courtesy  also,  answering  the  subpo?na,  which  specifies, 
or  at  least  leads  me  to  believe,  that  I  am  to  answer  cer- 
tain questions  in  regard  to  a  voucher  of  $5,500,  and  I 
have  tried  to  answer  them,  that  I  did  receive  the  voucher, 
and  did  receive  the  money,  and  acted  without  pay  as  dis- 
bursing agent  for  the  committee,  and  without  any  dis- 
courtesy I  am  declining  to  answer  specific  questions  that 
I  can  answer  only  to  the  committee. 

m 


MR.  MUNRO:    The  hearing  is  concluded.    I  would 
like  to  continue  this  until  some  day  next  week. 
And  further  deponent  saith  not. 


Subscribed  and  sworn  to  before  me  this day 

of ,  A.  D.  1915. 


Whereupon  the  further  hearing  of  said  cause  was 
adjourned  until  Wednesday,  December  8th,  1915,  at  10 
o'clock  A.  M. 

Claiborne  S.  Close,  being  produced  and  sworn  as  a 
witness  on  July  10,  1916,  testified  as  follows : 

Q.  To  refresh  your  recollection,  I  hand  you  what 
purports  to  be  a  copy  of  voucher  No.  77888,  which  reads 
as  follows:  Springfield,  June  29,  1915.  To  C.  S.  Close, 
expenses  contracted  for  in  the  holding  of  committee  meet- 
ings for  traveling,  hotels,  messengers  and  other  neces- 
sary expenditures  of  members  of  the  committee  in  the 
performance  of  their  duties  under  Senate  Resolution  64, 
Nine  Hundred  Sixty-two  Dollars  and  Seventy  Cents 
($962.70),  payable  from  committee's  expense  fund  under 
Senate  Resolution  No.  64.  Approved,  Barratt  O'Hara, 
Lieutenant-Governor.  Did  you  ever  have  a  voucher  for 
that  amount!  A.  I  think  I  did,  sir. 

Q.  How  much  of  that  bill  $962.70  were  services  and 
how  much  expenses  ? 

A.  It  was  none  of  my  expenses ;  that  was  money  for 
the  committee. 

Q.     Did  you  get  this  money  yourself? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     For  your  own  purposes  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  What  did  you  do  with  the  money!  This  here 
$900.00  that  you  got! 

A.  That  was  a  different  committee  altogether,  you 
are  talking  of  the  Vice  Committee  now,  are  you! 

Q.  If  you  did  not  get  it  for  yourself,  what  did  you 
do  with  the  money  ? 

A.    I  paid  the  bills  of  the  committee. 

167 


Q.     Did  you  pay  the  bills  after  yon  got  the  money  or 
before! 

A.     I  judge  most  of  them  before. 

Q.     Then  yon  advanced  the  money,  did  yon? 

A.    I  think  I  did. 

Q.    Was  it  yonr  own  money  yon  advanced  ? 

A.     It  must  have  been.  I  had  no  other  money. 

Q.     Xow.  I  understand  yon  that  this  was  all  expenses 
and  not  services,  is  that  correct? 

A.     I  received  no  money  for  my  services  on  that 
committee? 

Q.    Now,  did  yon  have  an  itemized  account  of  the 
expenses  which  made  up  this  $962.70  ? 

A.     I  believe  if  yon  refer  to  the  secretary  or  chair- 
man  of  tint  committee  yon  will  find  that. 

Q.     Did  yon  have  an  itemized  account  of  the  expenses 
which  made  up  the  $962.70? 

A.     I  don't  remember  whether  I  did  or  not. 

Q.    When  did  yon  advance  this  money? 

A-     That  I  cannot  tell  you  now. 

Q.     Was  it  during  the  year  1915  ? 

A.     That  I  cannot  tell  yon. 

Q.    Well,  did  yon  consider  that  you  loaned  this 
money  to  somebody? 

A.     Xo.  sir,  I  paid  different  bills  with  it,  I  told  you. 

Q.     Out  of  your  own  funds? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Yon  kept  an  account  of  these  bills  from  time  to 
time? 

A.    I  did  notT  the  secretary  of  the  committee  or 
chairman  did. 

Q.    Yon  did  not  get  your  money  from  him,  did  yon? 

A.    From  who? 

Q.    From  the  secretary  of  the  committee? 

A.    I  didn't  say  I  did." 

Q.    What  was  the  nature  of  these  expenses? 

A.    Well,  some  of  them  went  for  the  rental  of  com- 
mittee rooms  in  Chicago. 

Q.    What  rooms? 

A.     Committee  rooms  of  the  Vice  Committee. 

ics 


Q.     Whereat? 

A.    Located  at  29  South  La  Salle  Street. 

Q.     Did  you  pay  for  those! 

A.     It  came  out  of  that  money. 

Q.    Did  you  pay  for  them? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  did  not  advance  any  money  for  room 
rent? 

A.  I  paid  the  money  to  the  secretary  or  the  clerk 
and  I  suppose  he  paid  it. 

Q.  Then  some  of  this  money  was  not  yet  paid  when 
you  got  it  ? 

A.     Some  of  it. 

Q.     How  much? 

A.     I  don't  remfember. 

Q.  How  much  money  did  you  hand  over  to  the  clerk 
of  the  committee  ? 

A.     Well,  I  would  have  to  refer  to  the  record  of  it. 

Q.    And  you  say  you  paid  it  all  over,  $962.70? 

A.     Paid  it  to  different  parties. 

Q.     That  had  different  bills? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     You  say  parties ;  who,  name  them  ? 

A.  Well,  I  could  not  name  you  the  parties;  it  was 
for  room  rent,  electric  light,  telephone  and  various  other 
expenses. 

Q.     Who  was  the  clerk  of  the  committee  ? 

A.     Mr.  Trick  was. 

Q.     How  much  money  did  you  pay  Mr.  Trick? 

A.  You  will  have  to  refer  to  the  itemized  expense 
account. 

Q.  Have  you  no  memory  whatsoever  as  to  a  sum  of 
money,  nearly  a  thousand  dollars,  which  you  received — as 
to  the  disposition  of  it  ? 

A.  If  it  was  my  own  personal  money  I  might,  but 
it  was  the  expenses  of  the  committee;  it  was  not  my 
personal  money. 

Q.  What  I  am  trying  to  get  at  is  this :  How  much 
of  this  money  had  you  advanced  and  paid  bills  with  before 
you  got  it?  A.  I  could  not  just  tell  you  that  now.  You 

169 


must  remember  that  a  messenger  handling  money  and 
taking  care  of  that  work,  it  is  a  whole  let  of  work. 

Q.  During  what  period  of  time  did  you  pay  those 
bills? 

A.    Whenever  they  were  presented. 

Q.  During  what  period  of  time  did  you  contract  for 
them? 

A.  You  would  have  to  look  on  the  record  for  that, 
Mr.  Trick  has  that. 

Q.    Was  it  in  1915? 

A.    No,  sir,  1916 ;  it  came  under  June,  I  believe. 

Q.     The  voucher  reads  June  29,  1915? 

Q.    Mr.  Boy:    Do  you  mean  1916? 

A.    No,  I  mean  1915. 

Q.  Then  it  was  between  January  1st  and  June  29, 
1915,  is  that  correct? 

A.    I  am  not  sure. 

Q.  Now  will  you  give  any  other  item  you  expended 
it  for  except  room  rent? 

A.  Well,  there  is  a  lot  of  expenses  connected  with 
a  committee  of  that  kind,  Mr.  Munro,  and  when  we  paid 
them  they  were  itemized  out  and  we  turned  them  over 
to  the  clerk,  and  I  cannot  think  quick  enough  to  give  them 
to  you,  but  I  can  refer  you  to  the  itemized  account  and 
you  can  see  them. 

Q.    Where  is  that  account? 

A.  From  the  secretary  or  chairman  of  the  commit- 
tee. 

Q.    You  gave  it  to  the  chairman  ? 

A.    I  don't  remember,  sir. 

Q.  Then  that  itemized  account  was  money  you  had 
previously  paid  out  of  your  own  funds ! 

A.    Some  of  it. 

Q.    Well,  how  much  of  it  ? 

A.    I  cannot  remember  just  how  much  it  was. 

Q.  When  you  got  this  voucher  signed  on  June  29, 
what  did  you  do  with  the  voucher  I 

A.    What  did  I  do  with  the  voucher! 

Q.    Yes? 

A.     Which  voucher  are  you  referring  to? 

170 


Q.  To  the  voucher  for  $962.70.  What  did  you  do 
with  that  voucher  ? 

A.  Have  you  got  the  voucher  here  that  I  can  look 
at  it? 

Q.     What  did  you  do  with  the  voucher? 

A.     The  voucher  that  I  got,  the  original  voucher  ? 

Q.    Yes,  sir? 

A.    Why,  I  cashed  the  original  voucher,  sir. 

Q.    You  mean  you  cashed  the  voucher  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  did  you  cash  the  voucher? 

A.  The  same  way  you  would  any  other  voucher,  take 
it  to  the  bank  or  the  Treasurer,  or  wherever  I  happened 
to  be. 

Q.     Do  you  mean  the  voucher  or  a  warrant? 

A.  I  believe  I  mean  a  warrant.  I  am  not  personally 
acquainted  with  them  affairs  so  as  to  tell  you. 

Q.    Well,  you  received  several  vouchers? 

A.  Off  and  on  at  various  times  I  took  a  lot  of  vouch- 
ers down. 

Q.    Well,  you  got  warrants  back? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  would  get  the  money  back. 

Q.  Now,  don't  you  know  the  difference  between  a 
warrant  and  a  voucher  ? 

A.  In  some  walks  of  life  men  are  weak,  and  prob- 
ably that  is  one  of  my  weaknesses,  I  don't  think  I  do. 
You  present  me  a  slip  of  paper  and  I  get  the  money ;  I 
don't  pay  no  attention* to  what  it  is. 

Q.  In  this  particular  case  you  received  this  voucher 
on  June  29, 1915 ;  according  to  the  wording  of  the  voucher, 
there  was  a  warrant  issued,  that  is  an  order  on  the  Treas- 
urer to  pay  you  $962.70? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  that  is  what  you  call  a  warrant. 

Q.  When  you  got  this  voucher  you  took  it  to  the 
Auditor  and  somebody  in  the  office  stamped  a  number 
and  then  they  issued  a  warrant ;  that  is  right,  isn't  it,  that 
is  like  a  bank  check? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  how  you  cashed  that,  whether 
you  got  cash  for  it,  or  whether  you  got  a  check  for  it? 

171 


A.  I  don't  know  whether  I  got  the  money  here  or  in 
Chicago.  I  cashed  so  .much  money  during  that  time  I 
was  pretty  busy.  Senators  had  me  cash  money  and  bring 
it  up  to  them  and  consequently  I  did  not  pay  much  atten- 
tion to  it. 

Q.     Was  there  any  Senator  here  on  June  29th? 

A.     I  don't  remember  whether  there  was  or  not. 

Q.     Do  you  recall  who  gave  you  the  money? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  don't  remember  it. 

Q.  Wouldn't  you  have  any  personal  recollection  of 
receiving  the  sum  of  $962.70? 

A.  I  have  the  personal  recollection  of  receiving  it 
and  turning  it  over. 

Q.    You  don 't  remember  who  paid  it  to  you  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  You  don't  know  whether  you  got  it  in  Spring- 
field or  Chicago? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  whether  you  deposited  the 
warrant  in  your  bank  account? 

A.     No,  sir,  not  my  bank  account. 

Q.  What  is  your  custom  in  collecting  your  salary, 
do  you  receive  currency  or  do  you  receive  a  Treasurer's 
check? 

A.     Do  you  mean  on  the  State  at  the  present  time? 

Q.     Yes,  sir? 

A.  Why,  I  believe  I  receive  a  warrant,  and  then  I 
get  it  checked. 

Q.    What  do  you  do  with  that  check  as  a  usual  thing? 

A.    I  generally  deposit  it  in  my  personal  account. 

Q.     So  that  happens  you  are  paid  every  two  weeks? 

A.    No,  along  about  the  29th  or  30th  of  the  month. 

Q.  And  you  have  been  receiving  those  State  war- 
rants for  how  long  a  time  ? 

A.     Ever  since  the  first  of  January,  1915. 

Q.  So  you  are  quite  familiar  with  the  method  by 
which  money  is  paid  out  of  the  State  Treasury? 

A.     Just  as  I  go  and  get  it. 

Q.  You  have  to  indorse  the  warrant  on  the  back 
of  it? 

172 


A.    Most  assuredly. 
Q.     Do  you  know  Mr.  Ralph  Pope  ? 
A.    I  did  know  him,  sir. 
Q.    Where  did  you  know  him? 
A.    In  Chicago. 

Q.     Ever  see  him  in  Springfield? 
A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  know  Mr.  C,  F.  Trick! 
A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  known  him? 
A.    A  couple  of  years. 

Q.     Can  you  state  about  the  time  you  first  saw  and 
met  him? 

A.    I  believe  I  met  him  at  a  Spanish- American  War 
convention. 

Q.    Where  and  when  was  that? 
A.    I  believe  it  was  in  Scranton  last  year,  that  is,  to 
know  him  personally ;  I  knew  him  in  the  State  House. 
Q.    When  did  you  know  him  for  the  first  time? 
A.    I  believe  in  the  office  of  the  Lieutenant-Governor 
in  Chicago. 

Q.    You  say  he  was  an  attache  of  the  office  of  the 
Lieutenant-Governor  in  Springfield? 

A.    That  is,  not  his  private  office,  he  was  one  of  the 
Senate  employes. 

Q.    Appointed  by  the  Lieutenant-Governor  ? 
A.    No,  sir,  appointed  by  resolution  of  the  Senate. 
Q.    You  were    appointed   by   the   Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  and  approved  by  the  Senate. 
Q.    Now,  in  this  voucher  that  you  have  got  here 
there  is  hotel  expenses ;  do  you  remember  what  hotel  ex- 
penses you  paid  for  the  Vice  Committee? 

A.     I  would  have  to  refer  you  to  the  records  for  that. 
Q.    You  don't  know  the  name  of  any  hotel  ? 
A.     No,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  know  what  traveling  expenses  you  paid 
there? 

A.    I  would  have  to  refer  you  to  the  record  of  the 
committee. 

173 


Q.  Have  you  any  recollection  of  any  traveling  done 
by  the  committee  during  the  period  to  which  you  have 
referred,  January  1st,  1915,  to  June  29th,  1915? 

A.  I  would  have  to  refer  you  to  the  record  for  all 
that. 

Q.     You  have  no  personal  recollection? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  attend  any  meetings  of  the  Vice 
Committee  during  that  period! 

A.     Several  of  them,  yes,  sir. 

Q.    Are  you  sure  about  that? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Where  were  those  meetings  held? 

A.    In  Chicago. 

Q.     Whereabouts  in  Chicago? 

A.    La  Salle  Hotel. 

Q.     In  a  private  room  there? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Did  you  pay  the  expenses  for  that  hotel? 

A.    You  will  have  to  refer  to  the  record  for  that. 

Q.     What  were  the  dates  of  those  meetings  ? 

A.  I  would  have  to  refer  you  to  the  record  for  all 
that. 

Q.    Who  was  present  ? 

A.     Eef  er  you  to  the  records. 

Q.  You  have  no  knowledge,  but  you  are  sure  there 
were  several  meetings? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  are  mistaken  in  your  previous  testi- 
mony when  you  say  that  the  only  trips  you  made  out  of 
Springfield  during  the  year  were  on  the  Educational  Com- 
mittee and  trips  home  to  your  family? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.    You  say  you  are  not  mistaken  ? 

A.  I  was  not  employed  officially.  I  gave  you  my 
statement  of  the  official  trip. 

Q.     This  was  work  done — ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  liked  the  work  and  was  interested 
in  it. 

174 


Q.  And  you  advanced  this  money  because  you  were 
interested  in  the  work? 

A.     No,  that  was  in  a  legal  way. 

Q.     Who  asked  you  to  advance  the  money? 

A.     You  will  have  to  refer  to  the  records  for  that, 

Q.     Would  the  records  show  who  asked  you? 

A.  It  would  not  state  on  the  records  who  did  that, 
but  I  don't  just  remember  who  asked  me  personally. 

Q.  After  you  were  subpoenaed  to  come  here  to 
testify,  to  whom  did  you  communicate  about  it? 

A.    I  didn't  communicate,  I  was  in  Chicago. 

Q.    Who  did  you  talk  to  about  it? 

A.  Nobody  especially,  I  always  pay  my  respects  to 
the  Governor  as  an  attache  of  the  office. 

Q.    You  told  him  about  it  ? 

A.     I  didn  't  have  to  tell  him  about  it,  he  knew  it. 

Q.    Is  he  a  mind  reader? 

A.  I  told  him  about  it,  but  he  had  already  seen  it  in 
the  paper. 

Q.    It  was  published  in  the  papers? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  in  the  Chicago  papers. 

Q.  Did  the  Lieutenant-Governor  say  he  would  send 
anybody  down  here  to  represent  you  or  him  at  this  hear- 
ing? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  consulted  with  any  lawyer  since  you 
have  been  subpoenaed? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  know  Mr.  Mason? 

A.    I  have  met  him  on  several  occasions. 

0.  Have  you  talked  with  him  since  you  were  sub- 
poenaed ? 

A.     He  is  not  my  lawyer. 

Q.     Did  you  talk  with  him  since  you  were  subpoenaed  ? 

A.     I  don 't  remember  whether  I  did  or  not. 

Q.     Have  you  no  recollection? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  handle  at  the  present  time,  in  addition 
to  your  salary  and  expense  bills,  the  money  from  your 
office? 

175 


A.  From  my  office  ?  Only  the  expenses  of  the  office 
of  the  Lieutenant-Governor. 

Q.  Do  you  present  any  expense  vouchers  in  connec- 
tion with  your  office  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    You  just  draw  a  salary? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  your  salary? 

A.     Two  dollars  a  day. 

Q.  Since  the  sine  die  adjournment  of  the  General 
Assembly  on  June  30th,  1915,  have  you  been  continuously 
in  the  employ  of  the  State  as  a  clerk  in  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor's  office? 

A.    I  have. 

Q.  During  that  period  of  time  have  you  had  any 
other  employment? 

A.  I  am  manager  of  the  Capital  City  Band ;  I  have 
my  music  on  the  side,  which  is  my  own  personal  business. 

Q.    You  receive  an  income  from  that  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Outside  of  those  two  you  have  no  other  employ- 
ment or  have  not  had  any  other  employment  since  the 
date  I  mentioned  ? 

A.    Not  personally. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  talk  with  Mr.  James  J.  Brady 
or  any  employee  in  his  office  with  reference  to  the  pay- 
ment of  the  vouchers  which  I  have  mentioned,  the  voucher 
of  June  29th,  1915,  for  $962.70? 

A.  I  don't  make  that  my  business  in  talking  to  other 
people.  I  do  my  business  and  come  away. 

Q.  As  far  as  you  recall,  you  had  no  trouble  in  secur- 
ing the  cash  of  $962.70  for  this  voucher? 

A.  I  cannot  remember,  sir,  whether  I  did  or  not.  I 
always  went  to  the  office  and  got  my  money  and  walked 
away,  it  was  office  business  and  I  never  consulted  any- 
body about  it. 

An  anonymous  letter  was  received  which  reads  in 
part  as  follows : 

"If  you  are  the  Munro  who  has  those  Fergus  cases 

176 


tying  up  State  appropriations,  find  out :  Who  was  Pope, 
and  what  did  he  do  for  O'Hara? 

11 says  there  was  a  voucher  for 

Pope  for  $900  which  had  to  be  cashed  in  a  hurry  along 

with  two  others ;  they,  and , 

could  not  find  Pope  to  get  his  signature,  so,  says 

,  '"We  signed  his  name  to  it'  and  got  the 

money. 

1 '  Pope  has  since  died and 

now  fear  you  will  hear  about  the  $900  and  that  Pope's 
widow  will  hear  about  it  and  want  the  money." 

In  the  hearing  before  Master  Femes  and  Master 
Mason,  the  warrants  of  Pope  were  introduced  in  evi- 
dence and  photographs  taken ;  also  photographs  taken  of 
the  signature  of  Pope  on  his  pay  checks  for  services  ren- 
dered as  wagon  driver  for  the  Chicago  Herald.  Facsimile 
copies  are  herewith  reproduced. 


L 


ST.VrKOVlULINOIM         <   V 

•  rr\  1    v. 

^4^4  ••fcfc'i^ 

<>       .  , ,     m  .-.joiqib      ,(),       :>l^'L-6 " 

OlHIiUllk.lJ.  _l; 

,v  »   ,s vwv»-     ^  ^vJvyviX^'-iAv/W'-v  f^M^MlUJf  '  AA1N! 

1        v      !/  -V  .::.*::.    «\ 

//bAj. .  >A2/AflJX    b-^V^"-  ^.J^^ir^^ 

T^  THE  TREASURER, 

STATE  OF  ILLINOIS.  SPRINGFIELD. 


177 


POPE'S   WARRANTS 


To  THE  TREASURER, 

STATE  OF  ILLINOIS.  SPRINGFIELD 


8uuiiM,      JM30J9I5. I'll 


To  THE  TREASURER, 

STATE  OF  ILLINOIS.  SPRINGFIELD 


178 


On  the  back  of  the  foregoing  warrants  appear  the 
following  endorsements : 


The  following  receipts  were  introduced  into  evi- 
dence, showing  that  Pope  worked  for  the  Chicago  Herald. 
They  also  show  his  signature,  which  was  identified  by 
Miss  Vera  C.  Grote,  cashier  of  the  Chicago  Herald. 


RECEIVED    PAYMENT   IN  FULL    FOR    ALL   WAGES   DUE   UP 
TO  AND   INCLUDING   DATE  OF  THIS  CHECK. 


RECEIVED    PAYHlENT   IN  FULL    FQR    ALL   WAGES    DUE   UP 


179 


DEPARTMENT 


PAY  ROLL 


AMOUNT 


RECEIVED    FROM    CASHIER 
CHICAGO  HERALD 


4  a 


The  above  amount  for  salary  in  full  for  services 
rendered  up  to  and  including  date  shown. 


Signed 


Ore.  94. 


CIRCULATION 

DEPARTMENT, 


SALARY  TO 
INCLUSIVE 


AMOUNT 


NUMBER 


RECEIVED  FROM  CASHIER 
CHICAGO  HERALD 


/* 


The  above  amount  for  salary  in  full  for  services 
rendered  up  to  and  including  date  shown. 


*  *  *  * 


The  "   committee  expense  bill"  is  now  pending  in 
court. 


180 


FORGERY  IN  THE  RECORD 

The  Constitution  requires  that  a  record  be  kept  by 
the  House  and  Senate.  These  records  are  known  as  the 
House  Journal  and  the  Senate  Journal,  and  set  forth  the 
proceedings  in  these  two  branches  of  our  Legislature. 
In  the  year  1915  there  was  also  preserved  a  copy  of  the 
debates  in  both  the  House  and  the  Senate.  This  steno- 
graphic report  of  the  proceedings  has  been  printed  and 
distributed.  The  Journals,  likewise  printed,  show  votes, 
resolutions  passed  by  the  House  and  motions  made  by 
the  various  members.  The  debates  set  forth  what  these 
members  said,  and  the  two  records  must  be  read  side,  by 
side  to  get  the  proper  idea  of  the  proceedings. 

In  years  past,  there  had  been  instances  of  the  chang- 
ing of  bills.  A  few  cases  have  come  to  the  Supreme 
Court  in  which  legislation  has  been  changed  by  some  un- 
known person  and  made  to  read  differently  than  as  actu- 
ally passed.  To  my  knowledge,  no  one  has  ever  been 
caught  or  punished  for  such  a  criminal  act.  Of  recent 
years,  members  have  been  aware  of  such  practices  and 
have  guarded  against  it. 

I  deal  now  with  two  resolutions,  known  as  Senate 
Resolutions  76  and  77.  Owing  to  the  fact  that  one  of 
these  resolutions  is  now  in  litigation,  I  cannot  speak  as 
fully  as  I  should  like  at  this  time,  but  will  present  a  num- 
ber of  facts  concerning  these  two  documents. 

Two  dates  must  be  kept  in  mind  through  this  entire 
chapter,  namely,  June  19th  and  June  30th.  June  19th 
was  the  date  for  practical  adjournment  for  business  pur- 
poses of  the  Legislature.  June  30th  was  the  actual  sine 
die  adjournment  date.  On  the  first  date,  all  bills  pending 
were  disposed  of  and  a  resolution  was  passed  that  no 
further  business  would  be  taken  up  upon  the  reconvening 
of  both  houses  on  June  30th,  except  the  receipt  of  the 
Governor's  messages  upon  bills  presented  to  him. 

A  printed  journal  of  the  session  of  June  19th  indi- 
cated that  the  Senate  adjourned  immediately  after  the 

181 


presentation  of  Senate  Eesolution  75.  On  the  reconven- 
ing of  the  Senate  on  June  30th,  one  of  the  Journals 
(there  are  in  existence  two  printed  Journals  of  varying 
versions  of  this  date)  indicates  that  Senator  Ettelson 
suggested  to  the  presiding  officer,  Lieutenant-Governor 
O'Hara,  that  the  record  of  the  preceding  legislative  day, 
to-wit :  June  19th,  was  in  error,  and  that  it  should  show 
the  passage  of  Resolution  76.  Another  Journal,  likewise 
printed  on  June  30th,  indicates  the  Lieutenant-Governor 
stated  he  had  examined  the  Journal  of  the  19th  and  no 
corrections  were  to  be  made.  Be  this  as  it  may,  the  final 
printed  Journal  (Sen.  Journal,  page  1672)  of  the  Senate 
reads  as  follows : 

"The  President  of  the  Senate  announced  that  he  had 
examined  the  Journal  of  Saturday,  June  19,  1915,  and 
found  that  the  same  should  be  corrected  by  inserting 
Senate  Eesolution  No.  76,  offered  by  Mr.  Ettelson  and 
adopted  by  the  Senate.  The  Journal  was  ordered  cor- 
rected in  the  manner  stated  by  the  President  of  the  Sen- 
ate, and,  there  being  no  other  corrections,  the  Journal 
was  ordered  to  stand  approved  as  corrected." 

The  adjournment  motion  of  June  19th  was  made  by 
Senator  Swanson.  He  was  sworn  as  witness  before  Mas- 
ter Mason  on  December  9,  1915,  and  testified  as  follows: 

' l  Q.  Senator,  I  present  you  with  a  copy,  an  authenti- 
cated copy,  of  Debates  of  the  Senate  of  the  49th  General 
Assembly  for  1915,  and  call  your  attention  to  the  last 
day,  the  30th,  on  the  last  two  pages,  I  believe,  and  for 
the  purpose  of  refreshing  your  recollection,  I  will  ask  you 
if  there  was  any  resolution  introduced  purporting  to  be 
Senate  Eesolution  77,  and  purporting  to  authorize  the 
Lieutenant-Governor  to  secure  offices  in  the  City  of  Chi- 
cago for  the  Senators,  and  to  draw  upon  the  Committee 
Fund  for  that  purpose  I  I  will  ask  you  if  you  voted  for 
any  such  resolution  as  that? 

"A.     Not  to  my  knowledge. 

"Q.  Was  any  such  resolution  introduced,  to  your 
knowledge  ? 

"A.     There  was  not. 

' '  Q.     Now,  Senator,  if  you  will  turn  to  the  preceding 

182 


page  of  the  book  you  have  in  your  hand,  you  will  note  that 
Eesolution  75  was  apparently  introduced  and  passed,  and 
was  a  resolution — 

"A.     It  is  known  as  a  Death  Resolution. 

"Q.  A  Death  Resolution,  yes,  and  offering  sym- 
pathy to  the  widow  of  Harry  Woods.  What  is  the  custom 
about  resolutions  of  that  kind,  as  to  whether  or  not  they 
are  introduced  at  the  beginning  or  at  the  end  of  the 
session! 

"A.     Usually  introduced  at  the  end  of  the  session. 

"Q.  And  the  Senate,  out  of  respect  for  the  deceased, 
usually  rises,  isn't  that  correct  1  A.  That  was  the  custom 
in  the  49th. 

"Q.  Now,  by  referring  to  the  Debates  which  you 
have  in  your  hand,  I  think  it  appears  that  you  made  the 
motion  to  adjourn  on  that  day?  A.  I  did. 

"Q.  Do  the  Debates  show  the  introduction  of  any 
resolution  after  No.  75?  A.  These  Debates  do  not.  I 
will  say,  Mr.  Munro — 

"Q.  I  will  get  you  to  that  in  just  a  moment.  Now, 
I  present  you  what  purports  to  be  the  Journal  of  the 
Senate,  also  printed  by  the  authority  of  the  State  of  Illi- 
nois, and  call  your  attention  to  the  last  page  of  the  Jour- 
nal, for  June  19th,  1915.  I  will  ask  you  if  it  also  appears 
in  the  Journal  that  Senator  Swanson,  being .  yourself, 
made  the  motion  to  adjourn  upon  hat  day? 

"A.     That  is  correct. 

"Q.  And  in  said  Journal  does  it  appear  that  any 
resolution  was  introduced  after  Resolution  No.  75?  A. 
The  Journal  is  silent,  if  such  resolution  was  introduced. 

1 "  Q.    Your  answer  will  be  that  it  does  not  so  appear  ? 

"A.    It  does  not  so  appear. 

"Q.  Did  you  ever  vote  for  the  resolution  known  or 
purporting  to  be  known  as  No.  76,  and  purporting  to 
authorize  the  creation  of  a  commission  for  the  investiga- 
tion of  the  Chicago  schools,  commonly  known  as  the  Bald- 
win Commission? 

"A.     Not  to  my  knowledge." 

Senator  Richard  J.  Barr  testified  as  follows : 

Q.     Now,  calling  your  attention  to  the  19th  of  June, 

183 


1915,  that  was  the  last  real  legislative  day,  and  you 
adjourner  from  that  day  over  to  the  30th,  to  receive  the 
Governor's  messages?  A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  present  on  the  19th?  A.  Yes,  sir,  I 
believe  I  was.  I  think  I  was  there  that  day. 

Q.  A  number  of  Senators  have  testified  here  that 
they  were  present  up  to  the  final  close  of  that  day.  Now, 
if  you  will  turn  to  those  Debates,  you  will  note  on  the 
last  page  that  the  last  resolution  introduced  was  a  reso- 
lution in  memory  of  Harry  Woods.  Does  that  so  appear 
there,  Senator? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  it  does. 

Q.  The  resolution  was  introduced  and  passed!  A. 
Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Senator,  what  is  the  custom  in  Springfield  about 
the  introduction  of  a  resolution  in  memory  of  some  de- 
ceased person  of  prominence?  Is  it  the  almost  universal 
custom  to  introduce  the  resolution  upon  the  rising  of 
the  Legislative  Assembly? 

A.  Yes,  that  is  the  general  custom.  There  are  some 
exceptions,  however. 

Q.  But  that  is  the  custom  that  has  prevailed  there 
for  a  number  of  years,  is  it  not?  A.  Yes,  I  think  that 
is  always  the  custom,  unless  there  happens  to  be  more 
than  one  at  the  same  session,  at  the  same  meeting  of  the 
body. 

Q.  That  is  reserved  until  the  hour  for  adjournment, 
and  then  introduced,  and  out  of  respect,  the  Legislature 
arises? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  there  any  other  resolution  introduced  on 
the  19th,  after  Resolution  75  was  introduced?  A.  Well, 
I  have  no  recollection  of  it,  and  these  Debates  don't  show 
any  other.  Of  course,  if  there  was  another,  I  have  no 
recollection  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  move  to  correct  the  Minutes  on  that 
day? 

A.  Now  I  would  have  to  have  something  to  refresh 
my  memory,  to  say  as  to  that. 

Q.     I  hand  you  what  purports  to  be  a  printed  copy 

184 


of  the  Senate  Journal  of  the  19th,  and  ask  you  to  turn 
to  the  concluding  paragraph  thereof  and  state  whether 
or  not  it  does  not  purport  to  show  that  Senator  Barr 
moved  that  the  Minutes  stand  corrected  as  of  that  date. 
Is  that  correct! 

A.    Yes,  sir,  it  shows  that  way. 

Q.    Have  you  a  recollection  of  making  that  motion  f 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  just  have  not.  I  could  not  tell 
whether  I  did  or  not. 

Q.  What  does  the  Journal  show  as  to  the  last  reso- 
lution introduced  on  that  day?  A.  Eesolution  No.  75. 

Q.  And  that  is  a  resolution  for  what?  A.  Concern- 
ing the  death  of  Mr.  Woods. 

Q.  Is  there  any  indication  in  the  record  which  you 
have  in  your  hand  of  any  resolution  76  being  introduced  ? 

A.  There  is  nothing  following  75  in  the  shape  of  a 
resolution. 

Q.  Are  resolutions  introduced,  Senator,  according 
to  a  number,  serial  number?  A.  Yes,  sir,  that  is  what 
I  understand.  I  see  74  here  preceding  75. 

Q.  As  far  as  you  know  the  record  you  have  in  your 
hand  is  a  correct  transcrip  of  the  proceedings  of  June  19, 
1915? 

A.    Well,  so  far  as  I  know,  yes,  sir. ' ' 

Of  the  eighteen  Senators  produced  and  sworn,  all 
who  were  present  on  the  19th  denied  any  knowledge  of 
the  passage  of  Resolution  76. 

Under  Eesolution  76,  a  committee  known  as  the 
" Baldwin  Committee,"  consisting  of  five  members,  pro- 
ceeded to  take  testimony  in  the  City  of  Chicago. 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing,  the  Legislative  Voters ' 
League  in  its  official  bulletin  of  June  20,  1916,  says : 

"As  a  matter  of  fact,  Senator  Ettelson  was  not  in 
Springfield  at  the  time  he  was  purported  to  have  intro- 
duced Senate  Eesolution  No.  76." 


185 


RESOLUTION  77 

The  Resolution  77  is  of  an  entirely  different  nature. 
In  76,  a  motion  apparently  was  made  on  the  last  day; 
but  such  was  not  the  case  with  Resolution  77. 

Resolution  77  purports  to  authorize  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor  to  secure  offices  in  the  City  of  Chicago.  The 
records  show  that  it  was  introduced  by  Senator  Edward 
C.  Curtis,  of  Grant  Park.  In  the  preamble,  it  sets  forth 
that  the  Senators  find  it  a  great  inconvenience  to  have 
no  place  to  meet  in  the  City  of  Chicago,  where  their  rec- 
ords may  be  accessible,  and  that  because  of  this  fact 
the  Lieutenant-Governor  is  authorized  to  secure  an  office 
in  the  City  of  Chicago.  The  record  further  shows  that 
the  resolution  was  unanimously  adopted. 

In  the  injunction  suit  now  pending  in  the  Circuit 
Court  of  Sangamon  County,  it  is  alleged  that  this  resolu- 
tion never  passed ;  in  fact,  that  it  was  never  introduced ; 
that  it  is  a  mere  fabrication  inserted  in  the  record, 
and,  of  course,  void. 

Again  I  must  call  attention  to  dates.  The  resolution 
appears  in  the  record  of  June  30,  1915.  Among  the 
vouchers  which  were  approved  only  by  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor  are  the  following : 

Voucher  No.  70600— June  10,  1915. 

State  to  L.  J.  Lesser  &  Co. 
May  and  June  rent,  Chicago  office  used  by  President  of 

Senate  and  Senators  on  State  business   $160.00 

Approved :    Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  70601— June  10,  1915. 

State  to  Hotel  La  Salle. 
Approved:  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  70602— June  10,  1915. 

State  to  Chicago  Telephone  Company 13.20 

Approved:  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  70603— June  10,  1915. 

State  to  Superior  Press. 

Printing  cards  for  President  of  Senate 7.00 

Approved:   Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

186 


Voucher  No.  70604— Springfield,  June  10,  1915. 
State  to  A.  H.  Bevell. 

Furniture  for  office  of  President -of  the  Senate 248.25 

Approved:  Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  Xo.  70605 — Springfield,  June  10,  1915. 
State  to  Mead  &  Wheeler  Co. 

Bookcases  for  office  of  President  of  Senate 15.75 

Approved:   Barratt  O'Hara,  Lieut.  Gov. 

Voucher  No.  70606. 

State  to  Commonwealth  Edison  Company. 
Light  furnished  Chicago  offices  used  by  President  of  Sen- 
ate and  Senators   8.32 

APPROVED :   BARRATT  O'HARA,  Lieutenant-Governor. 

The  voucher  for  office  rent  bears  the  date  of  June  10, 
1915,  and  indicates  that  it  is  for  an  office  to  be  used  by 
the  President  of  the  Senate  and  the  Senators  on  State 
business,  and  the  rental  is  $160,  or  $80  monthly.  The 
check  is  made  payable  to  L.  J.  Lesser  &  Company.  The 
furniture  and  bookcases,  as  well  as  the  electric  light  bill 
and  the  telephone  bill  were  for  expenses  in  connection 
with  the  office.  L.  J.  Lesser  &  Co.  are  the  agents  for 
what  is  known  as  the  Tower  Building  in  the  City  of  Chi- 
cago. In  this  building,  Barratt  O'Hara  individually  has 
a  law  office.  In  the  hearing  before  Master  Mason,  the 
owner  of  the  building  was  called,  and  the  lease  between 
him  and  Barratt  O'Hara  was  introduced  in  evidence. 
This  lease  shows  that  on  the  30th  of  April,  1915,  Barratt 
0  'Hara  secured  rooms  1700,  1701  and  1702  in  the  Tower 
Building  "to  be  used  and  occupied  by  said  lessee  as  an 
office,  and  for  no  other  purpose  whatsoever."  The  lease 
ran  for  three  years,  commencing  on  the  first  day  of  May, 
1915,  and  ending  on  the  30th  of  April,  1918,  at  a  rental  of 
$80.00  per  month.  On  the  28th  of  June,  room  1703  was 
also  secured  by  Barratt  O'Hara  "as  an  office"  for  ten. 
months,  namely,  from  the  1st  of  July,  1915,  to  the  30th  of 
April,  1916,  at  $42.50  per  month. 

The  voucher,  which  Barratt  O  'Hara  issued  on  June 
10th,  was  not  approved  by  anyone  except  himself. 

Eighteen  Senators  have  been  examined  upon  three 
main  questions: 

First:    The  passage  of  Resolution  76; 

187 


Second:    The  passage  of  Resolution  77 ; 

Third:    The  understanding  about  the  $10,000.00. 

Each  Senator  who  was  present  denied  any  knowledge 
of  Resolution  76  being  offered  on  June  19,  1915. 

Each  Senator  who  was  present  had  no  knowledge 
that  Resolution  77  was  introduced  or  passed,  and  denied 
he  had  ever  heard  of  an  office  for  the  Senators  in  the 
Tower  Building. 

The  purported  introducer  of  the  resolution,  Senator 
Curtis,  testified  as  follows : 

MR.  MUNRO :  Q.  Senator,  I  present  you  the  jour- 
nal of  June  30th  and  call  your  attention  to  the  last  page 
where  it  purports  to  say  that  Senator  E.  C.  Curtis  in- 
troduced Resolution  77,  and  ask  you  if  you  introduced 
that  resolution? 

SENATOR  CURTIS:  A.  Well,  I  have  no  recollec- 
tion of  it,  Mr.  Munro. 

Q.    Will  you  say  that  you  did  or  did  not? 

A.    I  would  have  to  say  that  I  did  not. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  during  the  session  of  the  Legisla- 
ture, or  at  any  time  prior  to  it,  meet  with  any  other  sena- 
tors— or  at  any  time  prior  to  to-day,  meet  with  any  other 
senators,  or  meet  the  Lieutenant-Governor  at  his  office 
in  the  City  of  Chicago? 

A.     No,  sir. 

This  testimony  was  repeated  by  Senators  Barr,  Hull, 
Cornwell,  Broderick,  Boehm  and  others.  Senator  Smith 
of  Springfield  was  particularly  strong  in  his  testimony, 
stating  that  he  was  present  throughout  the  entire  pro- 
ceedings on  the  30th  and  that  he  would  have  protested 
against  any  attempt  to  create  an  office  in  the  City  of 
Chicago,  for  the  reason  the  State  Capitol  was  located  at 
Springfield  and  not  at  Chicago. 

It  will  be  recollected  that  in  the  testimony  of  the 
Lieutenant-Governor  he  stated  that  there  was  an  under- 
standing he  was  to  have  $10,000  out  of  the  committee 
expense  for  the  White  Slave  Committee.  As  I  gather 
from  his  testimony  he  was  to  draw  out  of  the  $50,000 
Committee  Expense  Fund  $10,000  for  this  purpose  and 

188 


that  there  was  an  understanding  among  the  senators  to 
this  effect. 

Of  the  eighteen  senators  who  have  testified,  each  of 
them  has  shown  that  he  knew  of  no  such  understanding. 
Senator  Curtis,  who  was  chairman  of  the  Appropriation 
Committee,  testified  as  follows: 

Q.  Senator,  did  you  know  of  any  understanding  that, 
of  the  sum  of  $50,000  appropriated  for  Committee  ex- 
penses, that  the  sum  of  $10,000  was  to  be  used  exclusively 
for  the  so-called  White  Slave  Committee  or  Vice  Com- 
mittee? 

A.  There  was  a  $10,000  item,  as  you,  of  course, 
know,  in  the  Omnibus  Bill  for  that  purpose.  Now,  out- 
side of  that,  why,  I  have  not  had  any  agreement  with 
anybody  about  it. 

Q.  Then  you  would  say  that  there  was  no  under- 
standing, so  far  as  you  were  concerned,  that  any  por- 
tion of  the  $50,000  appropriated  for  Committee  expenses 
was  to  be  used  by  the  "White  Slave  Committee? 

A.  I  think  I  understood  that  they  had  been  to  some 
considerable  expense.  I  do  not  know  just  what  that  was, 
but  I  had  no  understanding;  so  far  as  I  am  concerned, 
there  was  no  understanding  with  anybody  about  that. 

Q.  Was  the  sum  of  $10,000  ever  mentioned  in  con- 
nection with  the  Committee  expenses  of  $50,000? 

A.    Well,  no,  not  that  I  remember,  Mr.  Munro. 

Q.  You  mentioned  voluntarily  the  $10,000  which 
was  a  separate  item,  to  be  appropriated  for  the  expenses 
of  the  White  Slave  Committee.  That  failed  of  passage, 
did  it  not? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  passed  the  Senate  and  failed  in  the 
House. 

Senator  Harris,  another  member  of  the  Appropria- 
tion Committee,  testified  as  follows : 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  understanding,  written  or 
verbal,  to  the  effect  that  a  lump  sum  of  $10,000  should 
be  taken  out  of  the  appropriation  of  $50,000  for  Commit- 
tee expenses  voted  by  the  General  Assembly  and  applied 
for  the  use  of  the  so-called  White  Slave  Committee? 

189 


A.  There  was  not  any  understanding  with,  me  on 
that  subject,  I  know. 

Assuming  that  the  records  of  the  Senate  are  unim- 
peachable, and  that  Resolution  77  must  be  regarded  as 
having  been  properly  passed,  a  further  difficulty  is  pre- 
sented, namely,  that  the  Senate  is  not  a  separate  body 
and  is  therefore  without  power  to  create  for  itself  a  sep- 
arate office  and  incur  separate  expenses  after  the  sine  die 
adjournment.  The  purported  resolution  reads  as  follows : 

SENATE  RESOLUTION  NO.  77 

"WHEREAS,  Members  of  the  Senate  on  committee 
work  suffer  constant  inconvenience  when  their  labors 
and  investigations  take  them  to  the  City  of  Chicago  by 
reason  of  the  inaccessibility  of  papers,  documents,  books 
and  other  materials  necessary  in  the  performance  of 
their  duties ;  therefore,  be  it 

"RESOLVED,  That  the  President  of  the  Senate  be 
and  he  hereby  is  authorized  to  provide  suitable  offices  in 
Chicago ;  and,  further  be  it 

"RESOLVED,  That  the  expenses  for  same  be  paid 
from  the  fund  appropriated  for  the  Committee  expenses 
of  the  Forty-ninth  General  Assembly  on  vouchers  prop- 
erly approved  by  the  President  of  the  Senate." 

Mr.  O'Hara's  explanation  is  taken  from  his  testi- 
mony before  Mastor  Mason  as  follows: 

Q.  Your  law  office  is  now  in  the  Tower  Building,  is 
it  not? 

A.  I  expect  to  establish  a  law  office  there  very 
shortly,  yes. 

Q.  Haven't  you  a  law  office  there  now?  A.  I  am 
not  practicing  now,  no,  sir,  except  inasmuch  as  stated  in 
in  answer  to  a  previous  question. 

Q.  Before  your  arrival  this  morning  we  introduced 
in  evidence  here  a  lease  signed  by  you,  on  the  30th  day  of 
April,  1915,  for  Rooms  1700,  1701,  1702,  for  three  years, 
from  the  1st  of  May,  1915,  to  the  30th  day  of  April,  1918, 
at  $80  per  month,  to  be  used  as  an  office.  You  took  pos- 
session of  that  office  under  that  lease,  did  you,  on  the  1st 

190 


of  May,  1915  ?    A.     I  took  possession  of  the  office  the  1st 
of  May. 

Q.  And  you  have  possession  of  that  same  office 
to-day? 

A.    I  have. 

Q.  On  the  28th  of  June,  1915,  another  lease  was 
entered  into  by  you  individually,  for  an  office  at  Room 
1703,  for  ten  months  from  the  1st  of  July,  1915,  to  the 
30th  of  April,  1916,  at  $42.50  a  month.  You  entered  into 
possession  of  that  also,  did  you  not? 

A.     Mr.  Munro — 

Q.    I  will  come  to  the  explanation  later. 

A.  Do  you  think  as  a  lawyer,  Mr.  Munro,  you  have 
any  privilege,  under  any  possible  interpretation  of  the 
scope  of  this  hearing,  to  bring  my  private  leases  before 
this  hearing? 

Q.  I  certainly  do.  A.  Under  what  interpretation, 
Mr.  Munro? 

Q.  I  will  explain  to  you  in  another  question  right 
now.  Voucher  No.  70,600,  which  was  approved  by  you 
as  Lieutenant-Governor,  reads:  "State  to  L.  J.  Lesser 
&  Company,  May  and  June  rent  Chicago  office,  used  by 
the  President  of  the  Senate  and  Senators,  on  State  busi- 
ness, $160.00."  Was  that  voucher  issued  in  payment  of 
the  rent  under  your  lease  with  Lytton,  signed  by  L.  J. 
Lesser  &  Company,  for  the  months  of  May  and  June, 
1915? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  But  in  what  way  does  the  other  lease 
enter  into  it?  That  is  a  private  paper,  the  other  lease. 

Q.  Well,  the  voucher  does  not  state  on  either  date, 
one  of  the  rooms,  or  anything  else.  I  simply  wish  to 
show  that  you  have  the  two  ?  A.  During  the  months  of 
May  and  June  the  office  at  1700,  1701  and  1702,  I  believe, 
of  the  Tower  Building,  was  used  exclusively  by  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  Senate  and  members  of  the  Senate.  They 
were  not  used  by  me  in  any  way,  manner  or  form,  or 
under  any  possible  interpretation,  for  my  private  benefit, 
or  as  law  offices.  The  use  of  these  rooms  at  the  cost  of 
$160,  saved  the  State  of  Illinois  several  hundred  dollars 

191 


in  avoiding  the  payment  of  heavy  rental  for  oth.er  quar- 
ters. 

Q.  Did  the  Senate  authorize  you  to  pay  this  money, 
or  did  the  Senators  authorize  you?  A.  The  records  of 
the  Senate  will  show  if  there  were  any  authorizations, 
and  in  the  absence  of  any  record,  in  the  pages  of  the 
Journal,  the  law  will  show  under  what  authority  I  may 
have  acted. 

Q.  I  note  that  on*  June  10th,  1915,  you  approved  a 
voucher  to  A.  H.  Eevell  for  furniture,  for  office  of  the 
President,  $248.25.  A.  I  did. 

Q.  What  was  that  for?  A.  Mr.  Munro,  I  intend  to 
answer  that  question,  but  before  doing  so  I  would  re- 
spectfully direct  your  attention  as  a  lawyer  to  the  irregu- 
larity of  the  question  as  noted,  and  to  the  irregularity  of 
almost  all  these  questions.  The  Senate,  as  you  as  a 
lawyer  know,  has  exclusive  authority  to  inquire  into  these 
expenditures.  As  an  attorney,  you  know  that  you  are 
asking  that  question  without  the  least  authority,  and  for 
the  sole  benefit  of  the  newspaper  men  here  assembled, 
and  for  the  benefit  of  the  newspaper  men  simply,  permit 
me  to  make  this  statement :  For  many  years  the  Legisla- 
ture has  provided  a  fund  for  the  purchase  of  incidental 
supplies  and  furniture,  necessary  furniture,  for  the  use 
of  committees  and  for  its  presiding  officers.  Such  an 
appropriation  was  made  by  the  49th  General  Assembly. 
From  this  appropriation  was  drawn  money  to  pay  Mr. 
Eevell  for  certain  articles  of  furniture,  to  be  used  per- 
manently in  the  Springfield  office  of  the  Lientenant-Gov- 
ernor,  a  bill  then  being  proposed  and  later  passing,  pro- 
viding for  the  expenditure  of,  I  believe,  $50,000  for  the 
altering  of  the  State  House  at  Springfield,  to  provide 
more  rooms.  Under  those  plans,  the  Speaker  of  the 
House  and  the  Lieutenant-Governor  is  each  to  have  an 
additional  room,  the  room  now  used  by  those  officials 
to  be  largely  used  as  a  receiving  room  for  the  Senators. 
In  exactly  the  same  form,  by  which  the  furniture  for  the 
Speaker  of  the  House  of  Eepresentatives  for  the  48th 
General  Assembly  and  furniture  for  the  office  of  my 
predecessor  as  Lieutenant-Governor  were  purchased,  in 

192 


exactly  the  same  manner  I,  as  President  of  the  Senate, 
purchased  this  furniture  of  Mr.  Eevell.  During  the  period 
of  the  occupancy  of  the  offices  in  the  Tower  Building  by 
the  President  of  the  Senate  and  the  members  of  the  Sen- 
ate— which  please  note  was  during  the  time  the  Legisla- 
ture was  in  session — many  committee  meetings  and  such 
business  of  an  official  nature  was  being  transacted  in 
Chicago,  and  this  furniture  was  kept  in  the  office  in  the 
Tower  Building.  It  is  still  there,  and  will  remain  there, 
or  in  such  other  place  as  I  believe  to  be  a  safe  depository, 
until  the  alterations  in  the  State  House  have  been  made. 
These  we  expect  to  be  made  within  a  very  few  months, 
and  these  alterations,  without  which  the  business  of  the 
State  is  handicapped,  have  been  delayed  largely  by  rea- 
son of  this  litigation. 

Q.  Was  that  your  idea  when  you  purchased  this 
furniture  ? 

A.  The  question,  Mr.  Munro,  would  seem  to  me  to 
be  very  immaterial. 

Q.  It  is  not  necessary,  Governor,  to  remark  upon 
the  question.  You  need  not  answer  unless  you  want  to. 

MR.  MACEY:  He  may  state  the  facts,  not  what  the 
mental  condition  was. 

MB.  MUNRO:  I  note  that  Senate  Resolution 
77,  purporting  to  be  passed  on  the  30th  day  of  June,  1915, 
the  last  day  of  the  Senate,  is  as  follows:  "Whereas, 
members  of  the  Senate  on  committee  work  suffer  con- 
stant inconvenience  when  their  labors  and  investigations 
take  them  to  the  City  of  Chicago,  by  reason  of  the  inac- 
cessibility of  papers,  documents,  books,  and  other  mate- 
rials necessary  in  the  performance  of  their  duties,  there- 
fore be  it  resolved,  that  the  President  of  the  Senate  be 
and  he  hereby  is  authorized  to  provide  suitable  offices  in 
Chicago ;  and  further  be  it  resolved,  that  the  expenses  for 
the  same  be  paid  from  the  fund  appropriated  for  the  com- 
mittee expenses  of  the  49th  General  Assembly,  on  vouch- 
ers properly  approved  by  the  President  of  the  Senate.'* 
Was  that  resolution  offered  and  adopted? 

A.     The  records  will  show,  Mr.  Munro. 

Q.  Have  you  any  independent  recollection  about  it? 

193 


A.  My  answer  to  that  is  the  same  as  to  a  previous 
question,  that,  where  there  are  official  records,  the  rec- 
ords must  speak  for  themselves.  However,  I  do  not  desire 
to  make  a  statement  in  regard  to  that  resolution.  This 
resolution  was  offered  without  my  knowledge.  I  do  not 
believe  that  the  resolution  was  a  valid  resolution,  inas 
much  as  it  was  offered  and  adopted  on  the  30th  day  of 
June.  Not  one  cent  of  money  was  drawn  or  purposed  to  be 
drawn  on  this  resolution,  and  the  statement  given  out  to 
the  newspapers  some  months  ago,  and  carried  throughout 
the  State  of  Illinois  that  $50,000  had  been  appropriated, 
or  used,  or  sought  to  be  used,  by  the  President  of  the  Sen- 
ate for  the  support  of  a  Chicago  office,  under  this  reso- 
lution, is  without  one  iota  of  truth. 

Q.  Now,  if  you  have  some  recollection,  can't  you 
recall  whether  it  was  introduced  at  all  or  not? 

A.  As  I  have  said,  Mr.  Munro,  that  in  all  matters 
of  record,  the  records  must  of  course  speak  for  them- 
selves, and  that,  as  a  lawyer,  you  will  agree  with  me. 

Q.  Oh,  no.  We  are  contending  in  this  matter  here 
that  the  record  is  false.  We  contend,  Mr.  O'Hara,  that 
Mr.  Curtis  never  offered  the  resolution,  that  the  motion 
was  never  put,  and  that  there  was  no  vote  ever  obtained : 
that  somebody  surreptitiously  inserted  this  resolution 
into  the  record.  It  is  the  only  business  transacted  on 
that  day  except  the  business  with  reference  to  the  Bald- 
win committee,  and  I  ask  you  now  if  you  have  any  inde- 
pendent recollection  of  this  resolution  being  introduced 
or  voted  upon.  A.  It  is  my  understanding,  Mr.  Munro, 
and  certainly  it  must  be  your  understanding,  that  the 
highest  court  in  this  State-  has  held  that  there  is  no  going 
back  of  the  official  Journal  of  either  house  of  the  Legis- 
lature. During  the  last  day  of  the  session,  as  on  other 
occasions,  I  did  not  preside  all  of  the  time.  I  presume 
the  records  will  show  that  Senator  Kennedy,  President 
pro  tern  of  the  Senate,  and  other  Senators,  called  to  pre- 
side perhaps  during  the  49th  General  Assembly,  acted  as 
presiding  officers  one-third  of  the  time.  I  cannot  have 
any  independent  recollection  of  any  bills  or  of  any  reso- 
lution, but  if  it  is  sought — but  if  the  intimation  is  sought 

194 


that  any  resolution  of  any  nature  was  ever  placed  upon 
the  Journal  of  the  Senate,  irregularly,  and  illegally,  such 
intimation  must  spring  from  other  motives  than  knowl- 
edge. During  the  two  sessions  that  I  presided  as  Presi- 
dent of  the  Senate,  each  and  every  Senator  was  accorded 
his  full  constitutional  rights,  and  by  unanimous  votes  the 
48th  General  Assembly  thanked  me  for  my  fairness  and 
my  impartiality,  and  this  vote  of  thanks  was  repeated  in 
even  stronger  terms,  and  by  unanimous  vote,  by  the  49th 
General  Assembly.  I  now  have  in  my  hand  a  watch  pre- 
sented me  by  the  members  of  the  49th  General  Assembly, 
in  token,  as  the  records  will  show,  of  my  fairness  on  every 
question,  and  my  courtesy  to  every  Senator.  Is  this  in 
answer  to  your  question? 

Q.  I  do  not  think  so,  but  if  you  insist  on  doing  it, 
why,  of  course,  you  may.  My  question  is,  do  you  have 
any  independent  recollection  of  whether  or  not  this  reso- 
lution was  introduced  and  voted  upon?  We  allege  fraud, 
and  fraud  would  make  the  resolution  non-existent.  Now 
if  you  say  you  have  no  independent  recollection,  you  can 
answer  it  and  say  "no."  If  you  say  you  have,  yon  can 
answer  it  as  to  that.  A.  My  memory  cannot  be  set  up 
against  the  records.  The  records  speak  for  themselves. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  state  to  J.  K.  Seagrave,  or  Auditor 
Brady,  that,  if  the  White  Slave  Committee  was  declared 
to  be  illegal,  the  $10,000  would  be  returned  to  the  State 
Treasury? 

A.  I  must  refuse  to  answer  that  question  on  the 
same  ground  as  my  previous  refusal,  a  privileged  com- 
munication. 

And  further  deponent  saith  not. 


Subscribed  and  sworn  to  before  me  this day 

of ,A.  D.  1915." 


195 


THE  SECRETARY  OF   STATE  AND  THE 
LEGISLATURE 

The  Secretary  of  State  is  the  custodian  of  the  rec- 
ords of  the  Legislature.  He  is  also  the  custodian  of  the 
State  Capitol  Building  at  Springfield.  He  has  other  and 
various  duties  to  perform,  a  large  number  of  which  are 
intimately  connected  with  the  Legislature.  As  an  exam- 
ple, he  is  the  presiding  officer  of  the  House  until  it  elects 
its  Speaker.  He  has  charge  of  the  State  libraries  at 
Springfield.  Of  all  the  State  officers,  he  comes  closer  to 
the  Legislature  than  any  other.  For  a  number  of  years 
it  has  been  the  custom  at  Springfield  to  vote  to  the  Secre- 
tary of  State  considerable  sums  of  money,  the  expenditure 
of  which  relates  to  the  Legislaure. 

In  the  49th  General  Assembly  it  was  voted  to  appro- 
priate the  sum  of  $15,000  for  the  Secretary  of  State,  "To 
pay  the  incidental  expenses  of  the  49th  General  Assem- 
bly or  either  branch  thereof,  to  be  incurred  by  the  Secre- 
tary of  State  or  to  be  expended  by  the  Secretary  of  State 
in  the  discharge  of  the  duties  imposed  upon  him  by  law 
or  by  the  direction  of  the  General  Assembly  or  either 
branch  thereof."  The  Constitution  of  the  State  has  pro- 
vided for  the  incidental  expenses  of  the  Legislature.  It 
says  that  except  for  the  salary  and  the  ten  cents  a  mile 
necessarily  traveled  each  way,  there  shall  be  "no  other 
allowance  or  emolument,  directly  or  indirectly,  for  any 
purpose  whatever,  except  the  sum  of  $50  per  session  for 
each  member,  which  shall  be  in  full  for  postage,  station- 
ery, newspapers  and  all  other  incidental  expenses  and 
perquisites." 

The  old  Constitution  before  1870,  in  place  of  this 
clause,  had  the  words,  "and  no  more."  It  developed  that 
the  members  of  the  Legislature  had  construed  the  words 
"and  no  more"  to  apply  to  salary  and  not  to  expenses 
and  therefore  they  had  voted  themselves  large  sums  of 
money  for  newspapers,  stationery  and  other  things.  For 

196 


newspapers  alone,  the  session  preceding  the  constitu- 
tional convention  had  voted  themselves  $35,400.80;  for 
stationery,  $9,760.40;  for  postage,  $8,460,  and  for  pocket 
knives,  $702.50. 

When  this  report  was  presented  to  the  convention 
there  was  a  storm  of  protest. 

"I  want  the  people  of  the  State  of  Illinois  to  wipe 
out  this  infernal  disgrace,"  said  Delegate  Snyder,  "if  it 
be  possible.  I  know  they  are  competent  to  discharge  a 
rascally,  thieving  public  servant,  if  they  can  only  under- 
stand what  practices  he  has  been  at. ' ' 

"Our  purpose,"  said  Delegate  Allen,  "in  reporting 
this  was  to  cut  off  that  system  of  swindling  and  thieving, 
sir,  that  has  been  established  in  the  department  below, 
and  known  as  the  *  stationery  department. '  We  propose 
to  give  to  the  member  fifty  dollars,  and  give  him  no  news- 
papers or  stationery  or  postage  stamps  or  other  per- 
quisites. With  that  $50  he  can  buy  more  reams  of  cap 
paper,  more  pencils,  more  penknives,  if  he  wants  them, 
than  he  can  use  during  the  session." 

Joseph  Medill,  a  ."member  of  the  convention,  ex- 
pressed his  views  in  the  kind  of  language  seldom  used 
these  days : 

"A  month  or  six  weeks  ago,"  he  said,  "we  were 
fresh  in  the  presence  of  exposures  or  allegations  of  leg- 
islative corruption,  fraud,  bribery  and  rascality.  Inves- 
tigations had  been  set  on  foot,  reports  and  documents 
from  the  state  officers  were  presented  to  us  to  prove 
that  our  Legislature,  for  a  long  succession  of  years,  had 
been  growing  steadily  worse  and  worse,  until  it  was 
affirmed  upon  all  sides  of  this  floor,  and  confessed  by 
members  who  held  seats  in  the  Legislatures,  that  the 
last  session  of  that  body  was  the  worst  of  the  entire  con- 
catentation  of  rascality." 

Almost  every  member  of  the  constitutional  conven- 
tion expressed  himself  as  being  in  favor  of  some  strong 
provision  in  the  Constitution  which  would  prevent  the 
members  of  the  Legislature  from  thrusting  their  hands 
into  the  public  treasury.  But  this  is  mere  history. 

In  1915,  regardless  of  this  constitutional  provision, 

197 


the  Secretary  of  State  delivered  to  the  members  of  the 
General  Assembly  pocket  knives,  combs,  hair  brushes, 
coat  brushes,  fountain  pens,  pencils,  stationery,  erasers, 
shears  and  other  supplies.  The  members  had  received 
their  $50  apiece,  put  it  in  their  pockets  and  then  accepted 
from  the  State  this  additional  remuneration.  This  cus- 
tom of  receiving  from  the  Secretary  of  State  these  vari- 
ous articles  has  been  in  vogue  so  long  that  men  of  the 
highest  repute  have  accepted  the  emoluments  without 
question.  I  doubt  if  more  than  a  few  members  of  the 
House  or  Senate  are  sufficiently  familiar  with  the  his- 
torical meaning  of  this  provision  of  the  Constitution  to 
give  it  any  regard.  Mr.  Stevenson,  the  present  Secretary 
of  State,  was  acting  in  line  with  what  his  predecessors  had 
done. 

The  Supreme  Court  in  one  of  the  Fergus  cases  has 
held  that  the  meaning  of  this  clause  is  plain  and  that 
the  members  are  limited  to  their  $50. 

This  will  have  a  wholesome  effect.  Under  the  old 
system  a  number  of  members  would  abuse  the  privilege 
of  having  their  stationery  supplied  to  them.  Outside  of 
the  first  installment,  which  was  amply  capable  of  taking 
the  ordinary  member  through  the  legislature,  they  would 
make  requisitions  upon  the  Secretary  of  State  for  large 
quantities  of  paper,  for  extra  installments  of  pencils, 
pens,  ink,  mucilage,  shears  and  what  not.  It  is  difficult 
to  see  how  a  single  member  could  use  a  dozen  pairs  of 
shears  or  more  than  one  box  of  pens  during  a  single 
sitting.  The  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  practically 
decides  that  the  Secretary  of  State  is  without  authority 
under  the  constitutional  provision  to  make  presents  to 
the  members  of  the  Legislature.  This  relieves  him  from  a 
great  embarrassment  and  saves  the  state  approximately 
$30,000  each  session. 

In  connection  with  this  matter,  the  decision  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  which  decided  that  an  appropriation  for 
telephone  calls  for  members  of  the  Legislature  is  uncon- 
stitutional, is  also  beneficial.  The  practice  at  Spring- 
field has  been  for  members  of  the  Legislature  to  use  the 
long  distance  telephone  on  their  private  affairs  and  have 

198 


the  State  pay  for  the  same.  At  each  session  a  consider- 
able sum  of  money  is  appropriated  for  this  purpose.  At 
the  last  session  there  was  appropriated  $2,500.  This  ap- 
propriation the  Supreme  Court  has  declared  illegal  and 
the  practice  has  been  ended. 


199 


Prior  to  the  recent  Fergus  decision  it  was  customary 
in  the  State  of  Illinois  for  many  departments  in  the  State 
Government  to  hire  attorneys.  In  the  Insurance  Depart- 
ment a  number  of  lawyers  were  on  the  payroll  besides  the 
regular  attorney  for  the  Insurance  Department.  These 
extra  attorneys  and  the  fees  which  they  drew  are  as  fol- 
lows: 

Charles  H.  Shamel,  services,  May  20,  1914,  to  May  20, 

1915  '. ". $4,000.00 

Cyril  \V.  Armstrong,  attorney 1,522.00 

Sidney  S.  Breese,  attorney 251.00 

McMillan  &  McMillan,  attorneys 400.00 

F.  D.  Drew,  attorney ." 400.00 

Phillip  J.  MacGuire,  attorney   .  . .' 2,180.00 

Out  of  an  appropriation  to  the  Governor  for  the 
Economy  Power  &  Light  Case,  there  was  paid  to  E.  N. 
Zoline  $3,500. 

The  Legislative  Reference  Bureau  employed  Ex-Sen- 
ator Juul  at  a  salary  of  $500  a  month  and  Mr.  Thompson 
at  $250  a  month.  Various  other  attorneys  were  employed 
by  departments  throughout  the  State. 

For  the  Public  Utilities  Commission,  Mr.  Everett 
Jennings  was  chief  counsel  at  $8,000  a  year. 

Special  counsel  were  also  employed  to  represent  the 
State.  A  notable  example  is  that  of  Hiram  T.  Gilbert, 
whose  fees  for  a  period  of  less  than  twenty-four  months 
are  as  follows : 

1913— March  4 $  4,000.00 

April  4   2,000.00 

June     5 141.00 

June  27 300.00 

June  30 12,000.00 

Aug.  5 3,000.00 

Sept.  10 3,000.00 

Oct.  2   6,000.00 

Dec.     1    3,000.00 

Dec.  31   3,000.00 

200 


1914— Jan.  28  $  3,000.00 

Feb.  26  6,000.00 

Apr.  15 3,000.00 

May  4  188.00 

May  22  6,000.00 

July  14 6,000.00 

Sept. '24 3,000.00 

Oct.  29  3,000.00 

Dec.  1 3,000.00 

1915— Jan.  5  3,000.00 

Feb.  1 3,000.00 

March  2 9,000.00 


$85,629.00 

A  glance  at  the  bill  would  seem  to  indicate  that  dur- 
ing part  of  the  period  Mr.  Gilbert  charged  the  State  at 
the  rate  of  about  $300  a  day.  If  Mr.  Gilbert's  fees  were 
based  upon  the  time  spent  it  will  appear  that  less  than 
thirty  days  intervened  between  February  1st  and  March 
2d,  and  the  bill  being  for  $9,000,  he  charged  the  State  in 
excess  of  $300  a  day. 

A  portion  of  the  Fergus  decision  has  declared  that 
the  Attorney-General  is  the  chief  law  officer  of  the  State, 
and  that  any  other  appropriation  to  any  other  depart- 
ment for  representing  the  State  in  any  legal  proceeding 
would  be  invalid.  It  has  been  asserted  that  this  decision 
will  at  least  revolutionize  one  department  of  State  Gov- 
ernment. The  chief  law  officer  will  be  responsible  to  the 
people  for  the  conduct  of  the  State's  legal  matters  and 
will  represent  all  departments  of  the  State.  This  will  al- 
low the  Attorney-General  to  make  a  great  saving  in  the 
conduct  of  the  legal  affairs  of  the  State.  In  considering 
the  bills  for  attorneys  which  have  heretofore  been  paid,  it 
should  be  remembered  that  they  received  the  approval  of 
the  Governor  before  they  went  to  the  Auditor  and  upon 
his  approval  were  again  approved  by  the  Auditor  and 
finally  paid  by  the  Treasurer. 


201 


OMNIBUS  BILL 

On  June  2,  one  day  after  the  date  of  introduction, 
the  Journal  shows  (page  951)  that  Mr.  Smejkal,  "by 
unanimous  consent,  brought  up  House  Bill  975,  and  there 
being  no  amendments  it  was  ordered  engrossed  and  sent 
to  a  third  reading." 

The  important  part  of  the  Journal  is  this :  ' '  Having 
been  printed  (it)  was  taken  up  and  read  at  large  a  sec- 
ond time." 

The  Debates  of  June  2d  indicate  that  Mr.  Smejkal 
waited  until  the  House  was  about  to  adjourn.  It  was 
long  past  time  to  adjourn  for  supper ;  in  fact,  nearly  7 :00 
o'clock,  when  Mr.  Smejkal  brought  up  on  second  reading 
House  Bill  975.  (See  Debates,  page  892.)  Here  is  what 
he  said :  "I  desire  to  call  up  House  Bill  975  on  the  order 
of  second  reading." 

To  this  statement  Mr.  Purdunn  arose  and  said:  "Mr. 
Speaker,  I  desire  to  protest  against  advancing  this  bill  to 
third  reading.  No  member  of  the  House  has  received  a 
copy  of  the  printed  bill.  Therefore,  I  wanted  to  enter  a 
protest  against  its  advance.  I  don't  suppose  I  will  get 
very  far  with  this  protest,  but  I  desire  to  call  the  atten- 
tion of  the  House  to  the  fact  that  I  made  every  effort  to 
obtain  a  copy  of  this  bill  without  success,  and  I  under- 
stand the  same  is  true  with  other  members." 

To  this  strange  announcement,  the  Speaker,  having 
seen  this  same  trick  played  many  years  before,  and  having 
himself  been  for  a  great  number  of  sessions  Chairman 
of  this  same  Committee,  now  said:  "The  Clerk  informs 
me  that  they  have  been,  printed,"  and  then  addressing 
the  House  asked  the  question:  "Are  there  any  House 
amendments?"  What  a  travesty!  No  member  of  the 
House  had  yet  seen  the  bill.  They  had  heard  read  nine- 
thousand  words  and  the  Speaker  asked  them  if  they  had 
any  amendments. 

The  Debates  do  not  show  the  pause  after  the  question 

202 


of  the  Speaker:  "Are  there  any  House  amendments?" 
But  it  appears  that  the  Speaker,  not  being  able  to  secure 
any  amendments  to  this  bill,  said:  "If  not,  the  bill  is 
ordered  engrossed  and  to  a  third  reading." 

It  was  just  as  Mr.  Purdunn  supposed.  He  did  not 
get  very  far  with  his  protest. 

On  the  next  day,  June  4th,  Mr.  Smejkal  waited  until 
the  close  of  the  day,  and  then  asked  the  House  to  vote  in 
favor  of  the  bill.  He  stated  it  carried  an  appropriation 
to  meet  the  ordinary  and  contingent  expenses  of  the  gov- 
ernment, aggregating  $15,500,000.  On  the  roll  call,  Mr. 
W.  J.  Graham  of  Mercer  arose  and  said: 

"This  is  the  Omnibus  pill,  as  I  understand  it.  Last 
evening  it  was  advanced  to  the  order  of  third  reading, 
and  printed  copies  of  the  amendments  have  not  been 
placed  on  the  members'  desks.  Now,  it  comes  up  for 
third  reading.  So  far  as  I  am  personally  concerned,  I 
have  not  had  time  to  give  it  any  attention ;  therefore,  I 
desire  on  account  of  my  ignorance  of  the  subject  matter 
to  be  recorded  as  present." 

In  the  three  days,  June  1st,  2d  and  3d,  with  a  pro- 
test from  two  members,  Mr.  Smejkal  was  able  to  secure 
the  passage  by  the  House  of  an  appropriation  of  $15,500,- 
000.  In  the  entire  history  of  Illinois  no  appropriation 
bill  of  this  size  had  ever  been  passed. 

But  what  was  the  reason  for  so  much  secrecy? 

An  examination  of  the  bill  shows  that  certain  House 
members  had  claims  for  election  contest  expenses  and 
other  personal  matters.  The  list  follows: 

John  P.  Walsh $350.00 

Herbert  Kilens  850.00 

George  C.  Hilton  850.00 

Wm.  Ostrom  ." 850.00 

Thomas  E.  Boyer 850.00 

William  E.  Anderson 850.00 

E.  C.  Perkins 500.00 

William  M.  Brown 350.00 

Daniel  D.  Donahue 333.67 

Smejkal,  Klenha  &  Eing 95.00 

There  were  other  considerations  which  made  it  ad- 
vantageous to  have  secrecy.  That  secrecy  was  sought  is 

203 


amply  proved  by  the  fact  that  Purdunn,  who  was  decid- 
edly alive  during  the  session,  and  a  member  of  the  Ap- 
propriations Committee,  had  never  seen  the  bill.  No 
money  was  being  voted  to  Purdunn  and  he  had  enough 
curiosity  to  desire  to  know  what  was  in  the  bill.  The 
same  was  true  of  W.  J.  Graham.  He  was  not  willing  to 
go  on  record  as  voting  for  a  bill  which  he  had  never  seen. 

The  bill  went  to  the  Senate,  and  according  to  the 
Senate  Journal  (page  171)  it  was  introduced  and  read 
for  the  first  time  on  June  8th  and  sent  to  the  Appropria- 
tions Committee.  This  was  in  the  morning.  At  a  few  mo- 
ments before  adjournment  in  the  evening,  Senator  Cur- 
tis, chairman  of  the  Committee,  reported  the  bill  out  with 
amendments  with  the  recommendation  of  the  Committee 
that  it  pass.  It  was  ordered  to  second  reading  (page 
1256).  On  June  9th  Senator  Curtis  called  up  the  bill  and 
offered  eighty-three  amendments,  all  of  which  had  been 
recommended  by  the  Committee.  (See  Journal,  page 
1271.)  All  amendments  were  adopted  without  debate. 
On  June  10th  (Journal,  page  1314)  Senator  Curtis 
brought  up  the  bill  as  amended,  it  having  in  the  meantime 
been  engrossed,  and  the  Senate  voted  forty  to  one  in  favor 
of  the  bill. 

In  the  Debates  appears  the  only  discussion  of  this  bill 
(Senate  Debates,  page  1073)  as  follows: 

"Mr.  Curtis  (Kankakee) :  Mr.  President,  I  desire  to 
call  up  House  Bill  975.  This  is  known  as  the  Omnibus 
Bill. 

' '  The  President :  The  Secretary  will  call  the  roll  on 
the  final  passage  of  the  bill. 

"Mr.  Keller  (Jackson) :    What  is  that  bill? 

"Mr.  Curtis  (Kankakee) :  That  is  what  is  known  as 
the  Omnibus  Bill,  Senator.  This  is  a  House  Bill. 

"The  President.  The  Secretary  will  call  the  roll  on 
the  final  passage  of  House  Bill  975. 

"(Boll  call.) 

"Mr.  Denvir  (Cook):  Mr.  President,  I  would  like 
to  ask  the  chairman  of  the  Appropriations  Committee  a 
question.  Is  this  the  Omnibus  Bill! 

"Mr.  Curtis  (Kankakee) :    Yes,  sir. 

204 


"Mr.  Denvir  (Cook) :    What  do  you  know  about  it? 
"Mr.  Curtis  (Kankakee) :    I  know  a  lot  about  it. 
"Mr.  Denvir  (Cook) :     I  vote  'aye.'  ;? 

The  Senate  Amendments  are,  of  course,  reported  to 
the  House.  On  the  same  day,  to-wit,  June  10,  the  Senate 
reported  to  the  House  that  it  had  passed  the  Omnibus  Bill 
with  amendments.  (H.  J.  1063.)  Thereupon  Mr.  Smej- 
kal  moved  that  the  House  non-concur.  (H.  J.  1072.)  This 
action  is  reported  to  the  Senate  and  Mr.  Curtis  moves  that 
the  Senate  refuse  to  recede  from  its  amendments.  (S.  J. 
1365.) 

This  is  what  the  French  call  an  impasse.  In  plain 
English,  we  would  say  that  the  House  has  refused  to  go 
ahead  and  the  Senate  has  refused  to  back  up.  But,  down 
underneath,  the  wise  ones  knew  that  Mr.  Curtis '  amend- 
ments would  throw  the  bill  into  hopeless  confusion  and 
that  Mr.  Smejkal  had  no  objection  to  such  a  result. 

For  as  soon  as  Mr.  Curtis  had  induced  the  Senate  to 
refuse  to  recede,  he  made  a  motion  that  the  Senate  ap- 
point a  committee  of  five,  known  as  a  Conference  Com- 
mittee, and  the  Lieutenant-Governor  appointed  the  fol- 
lowing: Curtis,  Barr,  Cliffe,  Hughes  and  Piercy. 

In  the  meantime,  Mr.  Smejkal  (H.  J.  1167)  moved 
that  the  House  appoint  a  committee  to  confer  with  the 
Senate,  and  the  Speaker  of  the  House  appointed  Smejkal, 
Dudgeon,  Harvey,  Xxorman  and  Igoe.  This  occurred  on 
June  15th,  five  days  after  the  failure  to  agree. 

Why  all  the  delay? 

The  answer  contains  the  crux  of  the  entire  matter. 
The  Legislature  must  adjourn  ten  days  before  the  first  of 
July.  It  is  already  tentatively  arranged  to  adjourn  on 
June  18th.  Everything  was  in  a  jam.  There  were  long 
sessions,  running  far  into  the  night ;  members  were  tired ; 
there  was  the  possibility  of  being  relieved  from  the  strain 
and  allowed  to  go  home.  No  one  wanted  to  fight. 

Waiting  until  the  proper  time,  they  finally  presented 
their  report,  namely,  at  2:00  o'clock  in  the  morning  of 
the  night  of  June  18th.  The  Constitution  and  Rulings  of 

205 


the  Supreme  Court  require  that  this  report  be  printed. 
It  was  not  printed.  We  take  our  authority  for  this  state- 
ment from  the  Debates  and  not  from  the  House  Journal. 
In  the  House  Debates  (page  1248)  Mr.  Smejkal,  in  the 
early  morning  hours  of  Saturday  (the  clock  having  been 
previously  stopped  at  the  hour  of  12 :00  o'clock  midnight), 
addressed  the  chair  and  moved  the  adoption  of  the  Con- 
ference Eeport  on  House  Bill  975,  to  which  Mr.  Mitchell 
of  Cook  said :  "What  is  the  Conference  Committee  Eeport 
on  Bill  975?" 

To  this  query  Mr.  Smejkal  elucidated  as  follows: 
"This  is  the  Conference  Committee  Keport  on  House  Bill 
975." 

Mr.  Mitchell  apparently  was  very  dense,  for  he  did 
not  seem  to  understand  that  Mr.  Smejkal  had  given  him 
any  information,  so  he  said:  "Will  the  gentleman  from 
Cook  wait?  I  will  say  that  it  is  my  constitutional  right 
to  know  what  the  report  of  the  Conference  Committee 
is." 

Again  Mr.  Smejkal  made  full  explanation,  for  he 
said :  ' '  This  is  the  Conference  Committee  Eeport  on  what 
is  commonly  known  as  the  Omnibus  Bill." 

Having  received  all  this  Valuable  information  from 
Mr.  Smejkal,  Mr.  Mitchell  was  somewhat  put  out,  for  he 
said:  "Now,  Mr.  Speaker,  I  think  that  the  Conference 
Eeport  ought  to  be  read.  I  suggest  that  it  be  read  so  that 
we  may  understand,  and,  gentlemen  of  the  House,  this 
bill  carries  with  it  $15,000,000  of  the  people's  money, 
and  two  years  ago  when  the  distinguished  gentleman,  who 
is  now  Speaker,  was  chairman  of  the  Appropriations 
Committee,  we  had  the  same  issue  at  about  the  same  hour, 
and  I  then  insisted,  two  years  ago,  as  I  do  now,  that  the 
report  should  be  read  so  that  every  member  might  know 
what  he  is  voting  on. ' ' 

After  Mr.  Mitchell  had  twitted  the  Speaker  for  hav- 
ing set  the  example  for  his  appointee,  Mr.  Smejkal,  the 
Speaker,  granted  the  request,  saying:  "Eead  your  re- 
port." The  debate  went  on  and  eventually  the  bill  was 
amended  by  adding  over  $3,000,000. 

206 


WHAT  CAN  WE  DO  ABOUT  IT? 

The  reader  of  the  story  told  in  these  pages  naturally 
asks  the  question :  "Is  this  common  to  public  affairs  in 
Illinois,  and  is  there  no  remedy  for  this  condition  which 
threatens  to  undermine  and  destroy  good  government?" 

The  reader  will  have  noticed  that  the  abuses  pointed 
out  are  not  confined  to  any  one  branch  of  the  state  gov- 
ernment or  any  one  state  officer.  The  law-making  power 
— the  General  Assembly — must  carry  its  share  of  the 
blame.  The  state  officials  whose  dereliction  has  con- 
tributed must  bear  their  share  of  the  odium.  Those  pub- 
lic officials  whose  duties  are  merely  routine,  commonly 
called  administrative  duties,  are  not  empowered  by  the 
laws  creating  and  controlling  them,  to  take  responsibil- 
ity of  action  and  effect  reforms  and  cures. 

There  is  one  state  official,  the  Attorney-General, 
whose  duties  are  of  such  a  character  and  the  scope  of 
whose  powers  is  such  that  he  may  well  be  described  as 
the  law  officer  of  the  state.  The  Supreme  Court  in  the 
Fergus  case  has  placed  the  office  of  Attorney-General  on 
a  broader  and  firmer  basis  than  heretofore  in  the  his- 
tory of  that  office  in  the  State  of  Illinois.  He  now  be- 
comes, by  virtue  of  that  decision,  an  official  of  such  tre- 
mendous power  and  the  scope  of  his  duties  is  so  broad 
that  he  ranks  in  importance  in  the  affairs  of  the  State 
of  Illinois  with  the  Governor.  In  initiating  the  correction 
of  abuses  in  the  affairs  of  the  State,  his  powers  exceed 
those  conferred  upon  the  office  of  Governor. 

An  aggressive,  courageous  Attorney-General  can 
stop  the  waste  of  public  money.  He  can  effectively  de- 
stroy the  padded  payroll.  He  can  insist  upon  honest  roll 
calls  and  that  the  journal  show  the  real  transactions  of 
the  General  Assembly.  He  can  compel  the  deposit  of  all 
public  funds  in  the  public  treasury  and  he  can  prevent 
the  illegal  enrichment  of  public  officials  through  the  loan- 

207 


ing  of  public  money  at  interest.  He  can  compel  the  peni- 
tentiary boards  to  deposit  in  the  public  treasury,  in  place 
of  local  banks,  all  money  received  by  them  for  the  sale  of 
manufactured  products.  He  can  force  the  Auditor  of 
Public  Accounts  to  pay  out  money  only  on  itemized  vouch- 
ers. He  can  demand  an  accounting  from  any  public  offi- 
cial who  has  in  the  past  or  who  may  hereafter  illegally 
appropriate  or  illegally  pay  out  any  public  funds. 

As  chief  law  officer  of  the  State  of  Illinois,  the  Attor- 
ney-G-eneral  has  the  power  to  bring  proceedings  for  the 
general  welfare  of  the  State.  He  likewise  has  a  discre- 
tion over  which  the  courts  have  no  control.  In  his  official 
capacity,  he  is  the  representative  of  all  other  public  offi- 
cials in  all  court  proceedings  involving  public  affairs. 
This  tremendous  power  lodged  in  one  man  presents  an 
opportunity  for  the  greatest  service  to  the  people  of 
Illinois. 


208 


